This case concerned an application to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (“VCAT”) to review a decision made by two councils to grant a permit allowing Iluka Resources Ltd (Iluka) to construct and use a pipeline, and removing native vegetation in the process, if necessary. Victorian National Parks Association (VNPA) (represented by the Environment Defender's Office) objected to this decision, arguing that the use of the pipeline to transmit water would result in a reduction in flows along the Glenelg and Wimmera rivers.

• Whether the maintenance of satisfactory environmental flows in the river and lake systems should have been a relevant consideration in deciding whether to grant a permit for the use of the pipeline;
• Assuming the above was a relevant consideration, would it be a proper exercise of discretion to refuse to grant a permit in these circumstances?

VCAT dismissed the application by VNPA to review the councils’ decision to grant the permit. After considering the purpose of the planning schemes, the tribunal, constituted by Justice Stuart Morris, concluded that VNPA’s concern regarding the use of the pipeline was not a consideration relevant in deciding whether or not a permit should be granted.

• Was the native vegetation to be removed in the construction of the pipeline inappropriate given the legislative and policy framework?

With respect to the subsidiary issue, VCAT was satisfied that the removal of the native vegetation would not ‘constitute a significant loss.’ This was given that the pipeline route would have minimal impact upon the vegetation concerned. Moreover, VCAT found that the conditions imposed upon the permit ensuring sound environmental practices, were adequate.

• The full decision is available on Austlii