Tasmania's Supreme Court has blocked a state government MP from clearing a huge tract of land on his farm after a seven-year court battle waged by environmentalists.
Despite likening part of their legal argument to that put by bumbling fictional lawyer Dennis Denuto in The Castle, Justice Stephen Estcourt has ruled in favour of the Tasmanian Conservation Trust, which had applied to stop Lyons Liberal MP John Tucker from clearing 1,800 hectares of native forest at his Ansons Bay farm.
Dennis Denuto, played by Tiriel Mora, is the lawyer to protagonist Darryl Kerrigan in his bid to save his home in the 1997 Australian movie The Castle.
Denuto famously argued "it's the constitution, it's Mabo, it's justice, it's law, it's the vibe… I rest my case."
In the film, Denuto loses the case — which is later taken up, and won, by a retired Queen's Counsel with extensive experience in constitutional law.
Tasmanian Conservation Trust chief executive Peter McGlone welcomed the Supreme Court decision.
"This is a fantastic outcome that has saved 1,800 hectares of native forest including habitat for numerous threatened species, including the Tasmanian devil, tiger quoll and New Holland mouse, and 491 hectares of critically endangered eucalyptus ovata forest," Mr McGlone said.
Mr Tucker's father, also John Tucker, applied to clear the land for conversion to pasture in 2009.
His application was refused by the Forest Practices Authority, which argued his plan would not properly protect threatened species as required under the relevant laws.
After losing his appeal of the decision, Mr Tucker Snr then applied for compensation, which was knocked back by Liberal Environment Minister Matthew Groom almost five years later.
"I am not satisfied that you have undertaken to manage the threatened native vegetation community under a conservation covenant or management agreement," Mr Groom wrote in his 2014 letter.
Mr Tucker Jnr successfully submitted a new plan to the FPA in early 2015.
Part of the Nature Conservation Act allows landowners who have not received compensation to reapply for certification.
'A bit of a wake up call'
In the Supreme Court, the Tasmanian Conservation Trust argued the plan submitted by Mr Tucker Jnr was different to that submitted by his father so did not meet that clause.
Justice Estcourt's decision agreed the FPA was "wrong to believe, as it evidently did, that it had no alternative but to certify the 2015 plan".
He described one aspect of Senior Counsel Lisa De Ferrari's argument as "not unlike that of Dennis Denuto" — but ultimately quashed the FPA's 2015 decision to certify Mr Tucker's landclearing plan.
Forest Practices Authority chief forest practices officer Peter Volker described the decision as "a bit of a wake up call".
"I think it's a bit of a wake up call for the FPA as a regulator, landowners and the government in terms of the change in community expectations around land clearing and conservation of natural and cultural values.
"The decision's has given some legal clarification around some very grey areas."
The Supreme Court decision does not prevent Mr Tucker from reapplying to clear the land, but any application would be assessed under new laws — including the Commonwealth EPBC Act.
In a statement, John Tucker said the decision was "very detailed and involves complex questions of law which we are still considering with our counsel".
"The decision to quash the determination of the Forest Practice Authority provides clarity going forward… that we can avoid in any future applications."
Mr Tucker said at "all times my late father and I have acted upon the advice of professionals and followed the recommendations and advice of the FPA".
