Aboriginal elder loses bid to block Olympic Dam expansion
Kevin Buzzacott first took his case to the Federal Court in early 2012, claiming then federal environment minister Tony Burke had not given enough consideration to several issues before granting approval.
Mr Buzzacott's appeal to the full court of the Federal Court was prompted when a single judge dismissed an initial action. But the full court also dismissed his appeal on Tuesday, more than 12 months after he first argued his case and more than six months after mining giant BHP Billiton put the expansion on hold.
In its 98-page judgment, the court found that the approval of the mine's expansion was not uncertain or lacking finality.
Mr Buzzacott had argued Mr Burke had not taken into account key aspects of the plan, including the impact of water extraction from the Great Artesian Basin and the risks posed by the storage of radioactive tailings.
His counsel also pointed to aspects of the expansion that were still to be resolved, including plans and conditions related to the construction of a desalination plant, ore shipments from the port of Darwin, and the construction of major pipelines.
The result was an approval that "wasn't really an approval", the court was told.
At the time of his appeal, Mr Buzzacott said he was taking his action "for my land". "We put up a good argument, a good story, to the judges," he said.
Frequently Asked Questions about this Article…
The full court of the Federal Court dismissed the appeal by Aboriginal elder Kevin Buzzacott, finding in a 98-page judgment that the approval for the $30 billion Olympic Dam expansion was not uncertain or lacking finality.
Kevin Buzzacott is an Aboriginal elder who launched a protracted legal challenge arguing that then‑federal environment minister Tony Burke had not properly considered key issues before approving the Olympic Dam expansion, including water extraction impacts and radioactive tailings storage.
The challenge pointed to concerns about water extraction from the Great Artesian Basin, risks from storing radioactive tailings, and unresolved plans or conditions for a desalination plant, ore shipments from the port of Darwin, and construction of major pipelines.
Kevin Buzzacott first took his case to the Federal Court in early 2012. The full court dismissed his appeal more than 12 months after he first argued his case, following a protracted legal process.
Mining giant BHP Billiton had put the $30 billion Olympic Dam expansion on hold more than six months before the full court dismissed Mr Buzzacott’s appeal.
In its 98-page judgment the court concluded the approval for the mine’s expansion was not uncertain or lacking in finality, rejecting the argument that the approval was effectively incomplete.
Buzzacott’s counsel argued those elements were still to be resolved and that outstanding plans or conditions—such as the desalination plant, ore shipment logistics from Darwin, and pipeline construction—meant the expansion approval lacked necessary detail.
The article highlights that legal and environmental challenges can be lengthy and focus on issues like water use, tailings storage, and infrastructure (desalination, ports, pipelines). Investors tracking large mining projects such as the Olympic Dam expansion and companies like BHP Billiton should be aware that regulatory approvals and related disputes can affect project timelines and decisions.
Call 1300 880 160
Start a chat
Schedule a call
