378DContravention of condition of authorisation—offence by holder

#### 378D Contravention of condition of authorisation—offence by holder 378D Contravention of condition of authorisation—offence by holder > > (1) If a condition of an authorisation is contravened by any person, each holder of the authorisation is guilty of an offence. > > > > Maximum penalty— > > > > > (a) in the case of a corporation—10,000 penalty units, and, in the case of a continuing offence, a further penalty of 1,000 penalty units for each day that the offence continues, or > > > > > (b) in the case of a natural person—2,000 penalty units, and, in the case of a continuing offence, a further penalty of 200 penalty units for each day that the offence continues. > > > > Note. > > > > An offence against subsection (1) committed by a corporation is an executive liability offence attracting executive liability for a director or other person involved in the management of the corporation—see section 378F. > > > (2) If a condition of a mining lease, in its application to or in respect of a mining sublease area, is contravened by any person, the holder of the sublease is guilty of an offence. > > > > Maximum penalty— > > > > > (a) in the case of a corporation—10,000 penalty units, and, in the case of a continuing offence, a further penalty of 1,000 penalty units for each day that the offence continues, or > > > > > (b) in the case of a natural person—2,000 penalty units, and, in the case of a continuing offence, a further penalty of 200 penalty units for each day that the offence continues. > > > (3) In imposing a penalty under this section for a contravention of a condition, the court is to take into consideration the following (so far as they are relevant)— > > > > > (a) the extent of the harm caused or likely to be caused to the environment by the commission of the offence, > > > > > (b) the practical measures that may be taken to prevent, control, abate or mitigate that harm, > > > > > (c) the extent to which the person who committed the offence could reasonably have foreseen the harm caused or likely to be caused to the environment by the commission of the offence, > > > > > (d) the extent to which the person who committed the offence had control over the causes that gave rise to the offence, > > > > > (e) any other matters the court considers relevant. > > **s 378D:** Ins 2008 No 19, Sch 1 \[258\]. Am 2012 No 84, Sch 2.2 \[11\]–\[13\]; 2012 No 97, Sch 1.25 \[2\]; 2015 No 40, Sch 1 \[114\]–\[116\].