Ruling on Mount Pleasant coalmine shows ‘we cannot continue to dig up coal … and pretend the consequences have nothing to do with us’, group says
Get our breaking news email, free app or daily news podcast
A Hunter Valley community group has won Australia’s first high court case to consider climate change, in a ruling advocates say sets a binding national precedent for fossil fuel projects in New South Wales.
In a landmark judgment, the nation’s highest court ruled that the approval of MACH Energy’s Mount Pleasant coalmine expansion in Muswellbrook was invalid.
In a 3-2 split ruling, the high court dismissed the coal company’s appeal, with a majority of judges finding the state’s planning commission was required to consider how to mitigate the greenhouse gas emissions that would be generated by the mine when the coal is sold and burnt overseas, and failed to do so.
A majority of the court found the Independent Planning Commission failed to consider imposing conditions aimed at minimising these emissions – known as scope 3 emissions – to the greatest extent possible.
The Mount Pleasant expansion would double the mine’s coal output to 21m tonnes per annum until 2048. Some 98% of the projected emissions are scope 3 emissions.
The high court found the approval was invalid on a different basis than an earlier decision by the NSW court of appeal.
Wendy Wales is a retired science teacher and the president of the Denman Aberdeen Muswellbrook Scone Healthy Environment Group (Dams Heg) – the community group that brought the original case.
“Today the high court has said what we have always known: we cannot dig up coal, ship it overseas, watch it drive climate change, and then pretend the consequences have nothing to do with us and won’t be felt by us,” she said.
“The droughts, the bushfires, the floods – are directly connected to greenhouse gases, and massive fossil fuel projects like Mt Pleasant Optimisation simply add fuel to the fire”.
Wales said the ruling was an acknowledgment that many Australians had “already suffered extreme weather devastation”. She said lawmakers needed to turn their “full attention” to addressing climate change.
The proceedings, brought by MACH Energy, were the first time Australia’s highest court had been asked to consider a case on climate grounds.
MACH had appealed a 2025 decision by the NSW court of appeal that overturned a massive expansion of the company’s Mount Pleasant mine in Muswellbrook.
In the initial proceedings brought by the community group in the land and environment court, that court ruled in favour of MACH Energy. Wales, her partner Tony Lonergan and the Dams Heg community group have pursued the case through the courts for more than four years.
Elaine Johnson, director of Johnson Legal, which represented Dams Heg, said the decision confirmed that Australian governments needed to take responsibility for emissions generated by coal exports.
“The court has said that when considering coalmine expansions, our planning authorities must consider how to limit emissions generated from coal burned overseas. “Given that Australia is the second largest exporter of coal in the world, this is a very significant judgment.”
Sue Higginson, NSW Greens MP and spokesperson for climate change, said Wednesday’s high court decision could lead to “significant legal difficulty” for the Hunter Valley Operations coalmine extension – the biggest in the state’s history – which was approved by the Independent Planning Commission a week ago.
“Exactly the same as Mount Pleasant, 98% of the emissions from the … [HVO] coal development are scope 3 emissions. HVO’s environmental impact statement didn’t even account for scope 3 emissions at all, and the high court has been crystal clear that consent authorities must ensure emissions are minimised to the greatest extent practicable. It seems clear that the approval of HVO fails this test.
“Lawyers should be running to the courts right now with this judgment in hand, ready to stop coal approvals in their tracks,” she said.
A MACH Energy spokesperson said the company was disappointed with the outcome but accepted the court’s decision. They said the company would carefully review the judgment “to understand its implications for future project assessments and environmental approvals”.
They added the company would “continue to actively pursue all available options to ensure the long-term continuity of the Mount Pleasant Operation”.
The spokesperson said MACH Energy pursued the appeal to “obtain clarity on important questions regarding the scope of mandatory considerations in environmental decision-making”.
They said “thousands” of Hunter residents who relied on the Mount Pleasant mine for employment and income had “lived with fear and uncertainty for too long”.
The spokesperson said the state government’s approval of a separate modification to the mine in August would extend its operational life for six years.
Tania Constable, chief executive of the Minerals Council of Australia, described the high court decision as “a further blow to Australia’s prospects of meeting continued demand for our high-quality coal from global customers”.
“Now mines may have to work out how to reduce emissions from their export customers,” she said.
