Background
Christopher Ben Love appealed a remediation order issued by the Secretary under the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 (NSW). The order, issued on 14 August 2025, concerned land at 234 Dunns Creek Road, Woodlands, and required remediation and restoration of an area where native vegetation had been cleared.
Following an adjournment, the Court held a conciliation conference on 29 July 2026. The parties reached and filed an agreement that the appeal should be upheld and the remediation order varied under agreed terms, including work under an agreed Vegetation Management Plan.
The Court’s Holding
Commissioner Gray held that the Court had power on the appeal to vary the remediation order. The evidence established that native vegetation had been cleared on category 2-regulated land, causing damage and supporting the statutory basis for a remediation order. Love was the landowner, to whom such an order could be directed.
The Commissioner was satisfied that varying the order in the agreed terms was a decision the Court could properly make under the conciliation provisions of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW). The Court therefore upheld the appeal and varied Remediation Order DOC25/188578 in accordance with Annexure A. The Court did not assess the merits of the issues originally disputed by the parties.
Key Takeaways
- A remediation order may be varied on appeal where the statutory conditions for such an order are present.
- The Court may give effect to a conciliation agreement if the agreed outcome is within its powers.
- Upholding the appeal did not reflect a merits determination of the parties’ original dispute.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates the Land and Environment Court’s role in resolving remediation-order appeals through statutory conciliation. A negotiated variation can be adopted where it is legally available and specifies compliant remediation work, even without a contested merits ruling.