The Court refused an interlocutory injunction restraining mining exploration works pending judicial review of a work plan approval under the Mineral Resources (Sustainable Development) Act 1990 (Vic), finding that while CEPA's grounds (procedural fairness and failure to consider relevant submissions) were arguable, they could not be described as strong, and the absence of a viable undertaking as to damages was not excused because the litigation could not clearly be characterised as public interest litigation given that CEPA's members included neighbouring landowners who stood to benefit personally. The Court distinguished VicForests, holding that exceptional circumstances excusing the absence of an undertaking require strong grounds, a manifest or impending breach of law, and a plaintiff untainted by personal interest — features not established here. The Court also declined Clonbinane's invitation to finally determine the statutory construction questions at the interlocutory stage, instead expediting the final hearing, and ordered CEPA to pay the Department's costs of an abandoned notice to produce.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.