{"id":"BILL-s996","name":"Landholders—€™ Right to Refuse (Gas and Coal) Bill 2015","slug":"landholders-right-to-refuse-gas-and-coal-bill-2015","collection":"bill","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":445966,"registerId":"commonwealth-BILL-s996-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-05-05","status":"introduced","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[],"analysis":{"summary":{"status_summary":"The bill was introduced in the Senate on 4 March 2015 and has since been restored to the notice paper.","complexity_score":3,"likely_questions":["What must a prior written authorisation include according to the bill?","Which gas extraction methods are prohibited for corporations?"],"complexity_factors":["involves requirements for written authorisations","provides for court relief and civil penalties"],"plain_english_summary":"The Landholders’ Right to Refuse (Gas and Coal) Bill 2015 gives Australian landholders the right to refuse gas and coal mining on their land unless they have given prior written authorisation meeting specified information requirements, and creates civil penalties for breaches. It also bans hydraulic fracturing for coal seam, shale and tight gas.\n\nWhere corporations proceed without valid authorisation, landholders can seek court relief (including stop orders or compensation). The bill was introduced in the Senate in 2015 and was restored to the notice paper on 23 July 2025."},"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":4,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"The bill remains within its original, stated purpose: to give landholders a statutory right to refuse corporate gas and coal activity on their land and to prohibit corporate hydraulic fracturing for certain gas types. It does not materially expand beyond that core scope; the main complexities are in how that scope interacts with existing state regimes and with the distinction between corporate and non-corporate actors, rather than an expansion of subject matter."},"complexity_factors":["Relatively short, focused subject matter (landholder consent + fracking ban) rather than a multi-part regulatory overhaul","A small number of central defined terms (e.g. 'landholder', 'corporation', 'hydraulic fracturing', 'mining activities') driving key coverage questions","Conditional logic around validity of prior written authorisation (formal requirements for consent) introducing discrete compliance checks","Enforcement route via courts and civil penalties adds procedural detail and potential for litigation over scope and remedies","Interplay with state resource/land access regimes and constitutional limits (corporations power) creates legal complexity outside the text","Moderate implementation complexity due to substitution/circumvention risks (operators may change contracting structures)"],"plain_english_summary":"**What this bill does (mechanics)\n\n- Gives landholders (owners or occupiers of land) a statutory right to refuse corporations carrying out gas and coal mining activities on their land unless the landholder has given a prior written authorisation that meets the bill's requirements.  \n- Sets out the formal requirements for a valid prior written authorisation (what must be in writing and how consent must be given).  \n- Allows a court to grant relief to a landholder when prior written authorisation has not been given (for example, orders stopping activity or other remedies provided in the bill).  \n- Prohibits hydraulic fracturing (fracking) for coal seam gas, shale gas and tight gas when carried out by corporations.  \n- Creates civil penalties for breaches of the new rules.\n\nWho is affected\n\n- Landholders: gain a statutory veto (the ability to refuse) over corporations seeking to conduct gas or coal mining activities on their land.  \n- Corporations engaged in gas and coal exploration or mining: must obtain compliant prior written authorisation from landholders before entering or carrying out work; face prohibition on fracking and exposure to civil penalties and court-ordered relief if they proceed without valid consent.  \n- Courts and regulators: given a role to enforce the right and impose penalties or orders.  \n\nWhy it matters (official claim and practical effect)\n\n- The bill’s stated purpose is to protect landholders’ control over access to their land and to stop fracking by corporate operators. Mechanically, it shifts the legal starting point from allowing access under licence/permit regimes to requiring written landholder permission for corporate activity.  \n\nPractical consequences, incentives and trade-offs\n\n- Who pays: Corporations bear the immediate compliance costs (obtaining and documenting written authorisation, changing project plans to avoid restricted land) and potential penalty costs; landholders gain bargaining leverage and can demand compensation or refuse access entirely. Courts and regulators bear enforcement costs.  \n- Who decides: Landholders decide whether to allow a corporation onto their land by signing the prior written authorisation. Courts decide on enforcement and relief where authorisation is absent or disputed.  \n- Behaviour changes for private actors: Corporations will need to secure express written consent before starting activity, which increases transaction costs and may delay or change project design, scheduling and investment decisions. Some corporations may choose not to pursue projects where consent is hard to obtain.  \n- Substitution and circumvention risk: The bill targets \"corporations\" specifically. That creates a potential legal and economic incentive for operators to restructure arrangements (e.g. using non-corporate contractors or different contractual chains) to attempt to avoid the ban or consent requirement. Whether such strategies work depends on the bill's precise drafting and constitutional limits on Commonwealth legislative power.  \n- Market and competition effects: By strengthening landholder control, the law raises the cost and uncertainty of developing gas/coal projects for corporate operators. That may reduce the number of viable projects, change bargaining power in compensation negotiations, and affect project timetables and investment returns.  \n- Compliance burden and litigation risk: Corporations face a clear compliance burden (documented prior authorisation) and an increased risk of court challenges and civil penalties if authorisation is absent or defective. Landholders may need legal advice to understand and use the right effectively; some disputes will be resolved in court.  \n- Implementation and legal risk: The bill relies on Commonwealth legislative powers to bind corporations. This raises potential legal questions about the bill’s coverage (for example, whether non-corporate actors are affected) and potential conflicts with state land access or resource laws. That gives rise to implementation risk and possible litigation about the law’s scope.\n\nNet effect in plain terms\n\n- The bill converts landholder consent from a negotiated matter (often governed by state regime or commercial practice) into a statutory precondition for corporate gas and coal activity on private land and bans corporate fracking. This increases landholder control and legal certainty for refusal, while increasing compliance costs, contractual friction and litigation risk for corporate operators.\n\nSources and caution\n\n- The description above is drawn from the bill's stated provisions: right to refuse without prior written authorisation, requirements for that authorisation, court relief, prohibition on hydraulic fracturing by corporations, and civil penalties. The explanatory materials present protecting landholder rights and prohibiting fracking as the purposes; the summary above sets out how those purposes translate into legal rules and what economic and legal effects follow. Where the bill targets \"corporations\" specifically, that creates identifiable substitution and constitutional risks that affect practical operation of the measure."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/landholders-right-to-refuse-gas-and-coal-bill-2015","history":"/api/acts/landholders-right-to-refuse-gas-and-coal-bill-2015/history","analysis":"/api/acts/landholders-right-to-refuse-gas-and-coal-bill-2015/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/landholders-right-to-refuse-gas-and-coal-bill-2015/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/landholders-right-to-refuse-gas-and-coal-bill-2015/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/landholders-right-to-refuse-gas-and-coal-bill-2015/documents"}}