No evidence: NSW fails to put up
Court rules in Metgasco case
23 July 2014 05:51 GMT
Metgasco has hope for Rosella
07 July 2014 07:10 GMT
Metgasco goes to court
03 June 2014 05:13 GMT
14 August 2014 01:42 GMT
The NSW government was required to provide evidence in the ongoing court battle regarding the planned Rosella-1 well by 8 August, but has reportedly failed to do so.
According to Metgasco, the government cited “unavailability of key personnel” as the reason for not lodging the evidence.
Then on Tuesday, the government announced it had decided not to present evidence.
Metgasco chief executive Peter Henderson said the company was surprised by the government’s decision.
“It is especially disappointing given the Government’s claim a few weeks ago that our request for it to produce documents was ‘premature’,” he said.
“The information we were seeking as part of our request to produce documents has not been provided, which is inconsistent with the Government’s ‘premature’ claim.
“As a result, Metgasco will explore a range of other options to have the documents produced.”
On 14 May, the office made a decision to suspend the drilling of the conventional well.
The office gave Metgasco written material on the decision to renew the suspension stating it had changed its interpretation of “effective consultation” with stakeholders.
Metgasco believes the new interpretation “does not accord with its own guidelines”.
The company believes the office has no justifiable basis for renewing the suspension, stating it believed it lived up to its community consultation obligations, according to Henderson.
The company is looking into potential for a claim for damages to compensate for losses resulting from the suspension.
Henderson said the government’s decision did significant damage to Metgasco and undermined its position in the NSW industry.
“The decision not to submit any witness statements justifying the suspension makes it impossible for the decision-makers to be cross-examined.
“It is important in these circumstances that the suspension decision be properly justified by government and scrutinised by the courts.”
The court hearing has been now pushed back from October to December because of availability of judges.
Your message has been sent
E-mail this to a friend.
Membership includes a subscription to our weekly newspaper providing in-depth news from the energy industry, plus full-access to this site and its archives. Still not convinced? Try our free trial.
Already a member?
News from other NHST publications
All material published in the newspaper and on upstreamonline.com are Upstream's copyrighted material. Redistribution of any kind without a prior written permission of Upstream (including but not restricted to, redistribution by e-mail, publishing in part on your company's Intranet and publishing on Internet) of any material published by Upstream, will violate Upstream's copyright, and is prohibited by law. You may, however, download material from Upstream for your own personal use.
To protect your subscription investment, we've instituted a security system to protect against the electronic redistribution of copyrighted Upstream Online content.