CRIMINAL LAW — sentencing — environmental offences — construction of dam without Approval — unlawful clearing of native vegetation on waterfront land — actual environmental harm — pleas of guilty — whether deliberate offending — no financial gain — determination of objective seriousness — totality principle and married couple
Quick Take
1Where co-defendants are a married couple sharing a household and business, the totality principle requires consideration that a fine imposed on one is effectively a financial burden on the other, warranting reduction of individual penalties to achieve a just aggregate outcome.
2For strict liability environmental offences, a finding of recklessness rather than deliberate offending — here, a spur-of-the-moment decision to construct an unapproved dam after the approved dam's walls failed, without turning one's mind to the need for a new approval — reduces objective seriousness compared to knowing illegality, but the offending remains objectively serious as an affront to the regulatory regime.
3The fact that the unlawful works were subsequently regularised by a new approval does not answer the need for specific deterrence but is relevant to the overall assessment of penalty, particularly where defendants demonstrate genuine remorse and low likelihood of reoffending.
Case Details
Citation[2026] NSWLEC 91
CourtNSWLEC
JurisdictionNew South Wales
Unlock so much more with Barrister AI
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.
