News & Media

The Australian head of global oil and gas giant Chevron has flagged major concerns with an emerging pattern of environmental lawfare undermining the nation’s regulatory system and jeopardising energy projects he says are critical to international trade relations.

Chevron Australia president Balaji Krishnamurthy on Friday lamented the state of the country’s regulatory environment as his company faced off against Indigenous traditional owners in the Federal Court over the future of its Gorgon project off the West Australian coast.

Krishnamurthy said more and more Australian energy projects were facing waves of legal action despite already securing necessary state and federal environmental approvals.

“A broader pattern is emerging in Australia of legal challenges being mounted against major energy projects despite extensive consultation, detailed environmental assessment and comprehensive approvals processes,” Krishnamurthy said.

“Australia’s regulatory system works best when stakeholders can have confidence that environmental assessment processes are rigorous and transparent, and approvals – once granted – can be relied upon.”

Chevron is facing a new court challenge from Mardathoonera woman Raelene Cooper, who has previously led a high-profile campaign against Woodside projects in Western Australia’s Pilbara region.

Cooper filed a fresh challenge last week against the recent approval by the offshore petroleum regulator NOPSEMA of infrastructure underpinning the $80 billion Gorgon project. The action centres on environmental approvals of the company’s sub-sea Jansz-Io compression project, which is critical to supplying gas to its Barrow Island processing plant off the West Australian coast.

Cooper claims Chevron failed to measure and evaluate the climate impacts of the Jansz-Io project and failed to provide her with information about the potential impacts on her country of climate pollution from the work.

The two sides appeared before the Federal Court in Sydney on Friday, where lawyers for Chevron warned of the cost associated with ongoing delays. The company estimated it will lose about $40 million a month if key works to the compressor are delayed.

In a statement issued after the brief court hearing, Krishnamurthy said Chevron would vigorously defend the action, and suggested delays to the project could undermine Australia’s energy security.

“These legal challenges risk delaying approved projects that are important to Australia’s energy security and trading relationships,” he said.

“Chevron Australia’s Jansz-Io Compression Project is the latest major Australian energy development to face legal proceedings seeking to overturn an environmental approval.”

But a spokesperson for Johnson Legal, which is acting for Cooper in the latest case, said the legal proceedings allege that laws relating to the regulation of offshore oil and gas were not followed, and that consultations with Cooper and her family were not conducted in accordance with those laws.

“Proper consultation is a fundamental precondition to good environmental decision-making in the public interest, and everyone has a right to legal representation,” the spokesperson said.

Krishnamurthy’s comments reflect the mounting frustration among senior gas industry executives in Australia about the trend of “green lawfare”, including where activist groups use legal challenges in a bid to delay gas projects and drive up costs.

Then Woodside chief executive Meg O’Neill in 2024 blamed the stalling of investment in exploration and gas development on lawfare, uncertainty and approval delays, while Santos chief executive Kevin Gallagher has said governments need to find a better balance between allowing reasonable challenges around project consultation while still allowing resource development.

Woodside’s North West Shelf venture and its Scarborough project have been targeted by multiple legal challenges by Indigenous and green groups, while Santos’ $5.8 billion Barossa gas project in the Timor Sea was held up for more than six months by legal challenges that were eventually dismissed.

Of particular frustration is the Australian government funding for the Environmental Defenders Office, even after the Federal Court found the climate-focused legal service had presented confected evidence in the Barossa case.

Johnson Legal is run by Elaine Johnson, who worked for the EDO for 12 years.

“Activist legal challenges, that undermine both government policy and Indigenous culture, continue to plague the industry despite government assurances that they would put a stop to it a few years ago,” said MST Marquee energy analyst Saul Kavonic.

“The green activist lawfare is making Australia a less reliable place to invest, for no discernible benefit,” he said, adding that it amounted to “economic vandalism”.

Kavonic said that while there was an important place for legal challenges to government approval processes, the system was being abused by activists bringing frivolous cases to the detriment of the economy and Indigenous communities.