Court decides on New Acland’s attempt to wind up OCAA
COURT decides on New Acland Coal’s application to wind up Oakey Coal Action Alliance.
Toowoomba
Don't miss out on the headlines from Toowoomba. Followed categories will be added to My News.
SUPREME Court Justice Peter Davis has adjourned New Acland Coal Mine's application to wind up the Oakey Coal Action Alliance until a High Court appeal involving the two parties is heard.
New Acland Coal had applied in late May for the winding up order based on costs which the Court of Appeal had ordered OCAA to pay in an amount in excess of $735,000.
"Justice Davis adjourned the proceedings until OCAA's High Court Appeal has been heard," a statement from the mine's parent company New Hope Group said.
"NAC will now determine the appropriate course of action as a result of this decision.
"New Acland Stage 3 will create 187 new jobs within six months and generate $7 billion in economic activity over the life of the project.
"There remains no impediment to the Queensland Government granting the necessary approvals to enable this shovel ready project to proceed."
Acland and OCAA have been tied up in a series of legal battles in recent years.
The High Court appeal relates to the September Queensland Court of Appeal decision, which dismissed both grounds of the alliance's appeal and found a historic Land Court decision over the mine was affected by apprehended bias.
OCAA's application for special leave to appeal to the High Court was granted on June 5.
Previously, Environmental Defenders Office principal lawyer Sean Ryan explained his client's appeal saying it was "fundamental to the administration of justice that courts and their decisions are fair and impartial".
An original Land Court decision was found by the Court of Appeal in September 2019 to have been affected by an apprehension of bias.
"However (the Land Court ruling) continued to affect subsequent decisions," Mr Ryan said.
"Our client, OCAA, is now asking for clarity.
"The Acland farmers deserve decisions unclouded by questions of fairness, and OCAA is asking this High Court whether the correct law has been followed in this instance."