Skip to main content
Advanced search
The Point - home
DonateSubscribe
HomeWhat's NewOpinionOff the ChartsExplainersFactcheckAbout Us
The Point — home
DonateSubscribe
The Point — home
Advanced search
  • Home
  • What's New
  • Opinion
  • Off the Charts
  • Explainers
  • Factcheck
  • About Us
DonateSubscribe
Subscribe
  • Home
  • What's New
  • Opinion
  • Off the Charts
  • Explainers
  • Factcheck
  • About Us
The Point - home
Privacy PolicySitemapComplaints & CorrectionsNewsletter

The Point recognises the ancestral connections and custodianship of Traditional Owners throughout Australia. We pay respect to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures and to Elders past and present.

©2025–2026 The Point, an initiative of The Australia Institute

WHAT'S NEW

Australia’s first High Court climate case could reshape fossil fuel approvals

Australia’s first climate case to reach the High Court will be heard next week, in a landmark legal battle that could reshape how fossil fuel projects are approved nationwide. MACH Energy is challenging last year’s NSW Court of Appeal ruling that sided with an Upper Hunter community group.

By Tegan George

Fri 8 May 2026 16.34 AEST

Climate
Australia’s first High Court climate case could reshape fossil fuel approvals

Photo: AAP Image/Mick Tsikas

Republish this article

This article is licensed under Creative Commons — Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-ND 4.0).

Republishing guidelines

  • You must credit the author(s) and The Point.
  • You must link back to the original article.
  • You may not edit or modify the article content.
  • Images may be subject to separate copyright and are not included in this licence.

Australia’s first climate case to reach the High Court will be heard next week, in a landmark legal battle that could reshape how fossil fuel projects are approved nationwide.

MACH Energy – a subsidiary of Indonesian conglomerate Salim Group – is challenging last year’s NSW Court of Appeal ruling that sided with an Upper Hunter community group.

The decision invalidated approval for a 22-year expansion of its Mount Pleasant coal mine in Muswellbrook.

“The NSW Court of Appeal’s decision was truly groundbreaking and is already changing how proposals for new and expanded fossil fuel projects are assessed in NSW,” said Elaine Johnson, who will represent the community group in the High Court proceedings.

The ruling hinged on the Independent Planning Commission’s (IPC) assessment approach, with the court finding it failed to properly consider the full scope of the project’s emissions and the impact on the local environment – including from exported coal burned overseas, known as Scope 3 emissions.

“Our communities are enduring increasingly terrifying climate disasters, and nature is deteriorating before our very eyes,” said community advocate Wendy Wales.

“Yet our governments are continuing to throw fuel on the fire by approving massive new projects and expansions like MACH Energy’s Mount Pleasant Optimisation Project.”

Ms Wales and her partner Tony Lonergan – both retired science teachers – live on Wonnarua country in the Hunter Valley, on land farmed by Tony’s family for several generations.

The property sits adjacent to the Mount Pleasant mine.

As president of the Hunter Valley community group DAMS HEG (Denman Aberdeen Muswellbrook Scone Healthy Environment Group), Ms Wales has spearheaded their grassroots campaign through three courts over four years.

“We have felt the catastrophic impacts of droughts, bushfires, floods and a myriad of other tragic events. The short-term economic benefits cannot be given priority over the exponentially increasing long-term consequences,” said Ms Wales.

The NSW Court of Appeal ruling was a significant victory for DAMS HEG and the broader environment movement.

The community group had previously and unsuccessfully tried to overturn the approval through a judicial review in the Land and Environment Court, which found the IPC had considered Scope 3 emissions by acknowledging they would contribute to global climate change.

It also held there was no obligation to impose conditions once the issue had been addressed, a position previously considered in Queensland’s Waratah Coal decision.

The NSW Court of Appeal found the approach to be legally flawed, ruling the IPC had a mandatory obligation to consider how global climate change would translate into specific local impacts in the Upper Hunter, such as more intense bushfires and prolonged drought.

“What could be more important than protecting our unique natural heritage and biodiversity or ensuring we can live safely in Muswellbrook and the Upper Hunter for generations to come?” said DAMS HEG treasurer Tony Lonergan.

“The continuation of coal mining in NSW prioritises the private interests of a few over a safe climate and the future of our children and grandchildren.”

MACH Energy Australia is seeking to double the mine’s output to 21 million tonnes annually and extend operations to 2048.

The community group says if it proceeds, Mount Pleasant would become one of Australia’s largest export coal mines.

Mr Lonergan urged the Albanese government to start putting communities and the environment first.

“Addressing global heating means cutting our greenhouse gas emissions, and fast. Political parties have to face reality. Do you want to address this existential problem or not? Stop pretending,” he implored.

The Climate Council said the Albanese government’s climate credibility was being eroded, having now approved 36 new, expanded or extended coal, oil and gas developments since coming to power.

“Continued fossil fuel production is driving climate harms here at home, and Australia is still one of the largest exporters of coal in the world,” said Elaine Johnson, director at Johnson Legal.

The case will be heard in the High Court on 13 May 2026.

Advertisement

Related Articles

OPINION

ASIC is finally opening Big Oil & Gas’ books. Here’s why that’s a very big deal

By Amanda Holly

For the first time, the corporate regulator is checking whether these companies are telling the truth about what it will cost to remove the wells, pipelines and platforms they have left scattered across Australia’s seafloor. It is the most significant intervention into the sector’s clean-up accounting this country has seen, and it could rewrite the balance sheets of some of our biggest fossil fuel companies.

Climate
ASIC is finally opening Big Oil & Gas’ books. Here’s why that’s a very big deal

OPINION

Browse keeps changing its story

By Alex Hillman

In the past year, the new Browse gas project at Scott Reef has been pitched as the answer to a West Australian gas shortfall and as backfill for the ageing North West Shelf. Yet more than 50 years after discovery, and after $2.5 billion in development costs, it still hasn’t reached a final investment decision or FID, as it’s called. That usually says something about a project’s viability.

Climate
Browse keeps changing its story

OPINION

You can’t fix what you won’t name: COP31 program omits the words 'fossil fuels'

By Louise Morris

Imagine a fire brigade holds a crisis summit about the damage caused by fire, and how to fight fire, and bans the word “fire” from the agenda... That’s where we are with COP31.

Climate
You can’t fix what you won’t name: COP31 program omits the words 'fossil fuels'

OPINION

The Safeguard Mechanism has not cut emissions

By Ketan Joshi

This is the second piece of seven in an ongoing series examining the remarkable flaws of the Safeguard Mechanism, updating our previous analyses with new data, facts and figures as a review of the scheme kicks into gear.

Climate
The Safeguard Mechanism has not cut emissions