Federal Court proceedings in Melbourne are testing the validity of the 40-year life extension granted to Woodside Energy’s North West Shelf gas project off Western Australia, centering on allegations of ministerial bias, unsealed text exchanges, and disputed greenhouse gas calculations. According to court filings and statements reported by ABC News, Federal Minister for the Environment and Water Murray Watt approved the continued operation of the facilities until 2070 last year, prompting simultaneous legal challenges from the Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) and the Friends of Australian Rock Art (FARA).
Legal Challenges Target Ministerial Bias and Departmental “Cosiness”
During the Federal Court hearings, ACF barrister Angus Scott KC argued that an extraordinary volume of communication between Minister Watt’s staff and Woodside ensured the company secured a workable solution. According to ABC News, legal teams reviewed nearly 200 text messages and emails traded between government offices and the energy giant. Justice Catherine Button characterized the ACF’s argument during proceedings as pointing toward a “chumminess or cosiness between the department and Woodside.”
Submissions highlighted specific exchanges, including one where a government official paused communication regarding environmental law reform until a current matter cleared, prompting a reply from a Woodside recipient waiting to move forward. In another message cited by ABC News, a Woodside representative celebrated the conclusion of negotiations, stating, “Thanks Rachel! We got there!”
FARA representatives argued that Minister Watt maintained a “closed mind,” which led him to selectively emphasize the economic benefits of the North West Shelf—such as employment—while overlooking counterarguments. Barrister Sashi Maharaj KC alleged that the minister copied and pasted summaries of benefits provided directly by Woodside consultants into his published reasons.
Defense Cites Negotiation Strength and Disagreements Over Emissions
Defending the decision, Woodside barrister Damian Clothier KC asserted to the court that the modifications made to the approval demonstrated the effectiveness of the company’s advocacy rather than any underlying bias. According to ABC News, Minister Watt ultimately attached 48 conditions to the project’s green light after Woodside warned that initial proposals would amount to a refusal. Legal representatives emphasized that the minister was not legally bound to remain neutral.
Appearing on behalf of the minister, Stephen Lloyd SC maintained that Mr. Watt likely never saw the “innocuous” text messages sent by junior staff members. Furthermore, Mr. Lloyd stated that the minister explicitly rejected Woodside’s stance that industrial emissions had no impact on sacred Indigenous rock carvings in the nearby Murujuga World Heritage Site. According to Mr. Lloyd, the minister found that emissions did affect the petroglyphs and subsequently formulated conditions to mitigate those impacts.
Broader Implications for the Browse Basin Expansion
The legal battle also intersects with Woodside’s proposed $30 billion expansion into the Browse basin, which is Australia’s largest undeveloped gas reserve. According to ABC News, the project casts a long shadow over the North West Shelf proceedings because Woodside intends to process gas drawn from the Browse reserve—capable of powering 800,000 homes annually—at the North West Shelf plant near Karratha.
ACF barrister Angus Scott argued that the minister erred by factoring plans for the Browse basin into the North West Shelf decision, given that Browse is subject to a separate and ongoing regulatory approval process. A Woodside spokesperson defended the Browse proposal, telling ABC News that stakeholder feedback has shaped the project to reduce infrastructure footprints near sensitive environments like Scott Reef and implement safeguards for marine life.
International Intervention and Next Steps
The case also drew an intervention from United Nations envoy Astrid Puentes Riaño, who filed submissions supporting the ACF and FARA. According to ABC News, Ms. Riaño criticized the federal government’s legal stance that the minister was not required to account for the North West Shelf’s near 4 billion tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions. Ms. Riaño described that defense as “purely arithmetical,” arguing it failed to consider specific risks and significant harms mandated by international law.
Justice Catherine Button has reserved her judgment in the matter, with a final ruling expected at a later date.
Worth a look