Kalena Timber Company Ltd v Kalikoqu Development Company

The defendants, Kalikoqu Development Company and Integrated Forest Industries (Ltd), trespassed an area and used it for logging operations. Also the first claimant had intended to engage in logging operations in that same area. In 2007, boundaries had been established by forestry officers for the parties involved, but they were overlapping and not respected. 

Several reports had been completed, including an encroachment report, an environmental impact assessment and environment audit and a valuation report. The defendants meant that the reports were not conclusive or addressed to the Commissioner and therefore not official. Due to the existence of the reports, the Court meant that the defendants could not claim ignorance.

There were two main claims in the case, the first one damages for the trespass, and the second damages for environmental harm. The claimants were entitled to damages for the timber.

The claimants also meant that they were entitled to damages for environmental harm caused by the defendants. The reports showed a number of possible environmental impacts such as increased surface runoff, accelerated soil erosion, siltation, sedimentation, pollution of streams and rivers and pollution of local water sources. The reports did not mention any remedial work required to reverse the environmental damage. Since there was no evidence of a development consent, a public environmental report or an environmental impact statement required by the environmental laws of the country, it was not possible to assess if the damage had been caused by the defendants or if it was already present. The Court concluded that the damage reported was still caused by the defendants.

Four years after the operations stopped, there were still problems, especially with the water supply. Due to the lack of prior assessments it was impossible to conclude which of the defendants were responsible for the damage and both were seen as responsible as they had not made sure to get the proper consents. Damages were therefore awarded for the environmental harm.