Skip to content
Environment, Medical Health Aged Care

MEDIA ALERT: Federal Court decision: Doctors for the Environment Australia (DEA) v NOPSEMA and Woodside

Doctors for the Environment Australia 3 mins read

21 August 2025 

What: Federal Court will hand down its decision on NOPSEMA’s acceptance of the Environment Plan for Woodside’s Scarborough Gas Project 

When: Friday August 22 at 2:15 pm AEST

Applicant: Doctors for the Environment Australia (DEA)   

Respondents: NOPSEMA and Woodside Energy 

Presiding Judge: Hon Justice Shaun McElwaine  

Case name: Doctors for the Environment (Australia) Incorporated v National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority & Anor 

Case number: VID527/2025 

Video streaming: Federal Court of Australia - YouTube

 

Details

The Federal Court will hand down its judgment on the validity of NOPSEMA’s acceptance of Woodside’s Production Environment Plan for its Scarborough Gas Project at 2.15pm AEST this Friday. 

  

Doctors for the Environment Australia (DEA) initiated legal proceedings in April, challenging the decision of national offshore oil and gas regulator, NOPSEMA, to accept the Environment Plan that Woodside had submitted. 

  

Media release 

DEA will issue a media release as soon as possible after the decision is handed down on Friday.

 

CONTACTS  

DEA | Media and Communications Lead Carmela Ferraro | 0410 703 074 | [email protected] 

DEA | Executive Director Dr Kate Wylie | 0432 871 389

EDO | Media Adviser James Tremain | 0419 272 254 | [email protected] 

 

- END -

  

PREVIOUS MEDIA STATEMENTS 

1 May 2025 — Doctors challenge Scarborough gas field Environment Plan approval 

6 June 2025 — Doctors for the Environment test case on Woodside’s Scarborough Gas Project to proceed after court grants crucial costs order 

10 July – Federal Court Hearing: Doctors for the Environment Australia v NOPSEMA and Woodside   

 

BACKGROUND 

Federal regulations require an Environment Plan (EP) to be approved by NOPSEMA before offshore projects can be carried out by oil and gas companies. 

 

The regulations specify that an EP must include an evaluation of all environmental impacts and risks of the project. 

 

That evaluation must detail control measures that will be used to reduce those impacts and risks to as low as reasonably practicable (ALARP) and an acceptable level.  

 

The Scarborough Operations EP relates to the production of gas from offshore fields and transmission to onshore LNG processing plants. It identified greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions as an environmental impact and risk of those activities. Over its lifetime, the Scarborough Project will result in the release of an estimated 878 million tonnes of CO2-e. 

 

In evaluating the impacts and risks of GHG emissions, the Scarborough Operations EP stated that gas from the Scarborough Project may displace more carbon-intensive fuels and have a role in reducing global GHG emissions – but acknowledged that this is uncertain. 

 

In order to manage and abate GHG emissions, the Scarborough Operations EP included various control measures. These included:  

 

  • The implementation of (unspecified) “additional management measuresif annual reviews undertaken by Woodside reveal that Scarborough gas is not displacing more carbon intensive fuels or contributing to the global energy transition. 

  • Woodside supporting customers to reduce their emissions via investment in new energy products and lower carbon services. 

  • Woodside working with the natural gas value chain to reduce emissions in third party systems. 

 

These control measures were included in the Scarborough Operations EP as part of the assessment that the environmental impacts and risks of the project’s GHG emissions had been reduced to ALARP and an acceptable level. 

 

In the proceedings, DEA contended that: 

 

  • Those control measures (and related performance standards and measurement criteria) do not comply with the requirements of the regulations, in part because they are uncertain; and, because of that, 

  • The Scarborough Operations EP did not demonstrate that the environmental impacts and risks of the project had been reduced to ALARP and an acceptable level. 

 

In turn, DEA contended that NOPSEMA could not have been reasonably satisfied that the Scarborough Operations EP complied with the regulations, and therefore NOPSEMA’s decision to approve it was unlawful and should be set aside by the Court. 

 

ABOUT DEA

Read more about DEA here.


Contact details:

Doctors for the Environment Australia | Media and Communications Lead Carmela Ferraro | 0410 703 074 | [email protected]

Executive Director Dr Kate Wylie | 0432 871 389

 

Environmental Defenders Office | Media Adviser James Tremain | 0419 272 254 | [email protected]

More from this category

  • Environment, Transport Automotive
  • 12/12/2025
  • 14:27
NALSPA

Electric Car Discount review must drive clean energy transition and cost-of-living relief

The National Automotive Leasing and Salary Packaging Association (NALSPA) has today welcomed the federal government’s announcement of the statutory review of the Electric Car Discount, noting that the policy continues to be highly effective in encouraging Australians to make the switch to cleaner cars.The federal government announced today that next year it will review the Electric Car Discount, otherwise known as the EV FBT exemption which came into effect in July 2022.The review will consider the operation of the Electric Car Discount over the first three years it has been in place, as required by the legislation.“We will actively participate…

  • Banking, Environment
  • 12/12/2025
  • 10:38
Australian Conservation Foundation

NAB shareholders owning $9.74bn in shares call on the bank to do better on deforestation

Investors owning $9.74 billion of shares in Australia’s largest agribusiness bank have backed a resolution calling on NAB to disclose deforestation linked to its lending.* The resolution on disclosure of financed deforestation, facilitated by the Australian Conservation Foundation and co-filed by SIX, Australian Ethical, Melior Investment Management, was supported by 13.98% of shares voted at NAB’s AGM today. A second resolution, calling on the bank to set out a strategy to eliminate financed deforestation, was supported by 10.39% of NAB shares voted. Jolene George, head of corporate advocacy at the Australian Conservation Foundation, said: “The support for the resolution on…

  • Environment
  • 12/12/2025
  • 10:34
UNSW Sydney

Droughts lasting longer across Australia, study shows

A studytracking not only the forces that drive drought but the damage it leaves behind has revealed that droughts have lasted longer in Australia in recent decades, especially in areas with the most people and farms. UNSW researchers analysed drought trends across Australia between 1911 and 2020 based on rainfall shortages and falling river and dam levels. Their analysis showed that, since 1971, the time spent under drought conditions has increased across most of Australia, especially in the southeast and southwest, which are densely populated and key breadbaskets. The increasing dryness was especially felt during winter and spring, which are…

Media Outreach made fast, easy, simple.

Feature your press release on Medianet's News Hub every time you distribute with Medianet. Pay per release or save with a subscription.