Energy (J)

Meet the Co-chairs - TAGLAW

Brede, Jens
Kvale Advokatfirma DA

Meet the Co-chairs - TIAG

Pestana, Felipe Batista dos Reis
Grupo Planus

Energy (J)

Contact: Sylvain Bergès

The end of the feed-in tariffs for renewable electricity requires producers of “green” electricity to sell their production on the market. To optimize sales and balancing costs, many use the services of an aggregator.

Under Law No. 2015-992 of 17 August 2015 on energy transition for green growth, feed-in tariffs have been phased out for installations of more than 500 kilowatts. Producers now sell their electricity on the market and receive from EDF a monthly premium, named the contract for difference (“CfD”). This premium compensates for the difference between the income from this sale and a reference remuneration level set by the public authorities by a tariff decree, depending on the type of power plant.

Read the entire article.

Authors: James Plumb, Partner and Jasmine Wood, Associate

A compensation dispute between landholders and a major coal seam gas producer over compensation has been determined by the Land Court. 

In a decision handed down 18 August 2017, the Land Court has considered the provisions of the petroleum legislation regarding a review of compensation where the landholders contended there had been a material change in circumstances following the entry into a conduct and compensation agreement (CCA).

Nothdurft & Anor v QGC Pty Limited & Ors 1 provides helpful insight into how the Land Court will apply the material change threshold to compensation reviews. 

To read more click here, or visit

Author: Johanna Kennerley, Senior Associate

Mine rehabilitation and financial assurance (FA) is a hot topic at the moment, with many discussion papers and inquiries being undertaken by various levels and departments within government, including:

  1. The Commonwealth’s senate inquiry into mine rehabilitation (as it relates to Commonwealth responsibilities);
  2. The recent Queensland Treasury Commission’s ‘Review of Queensland’s Financial Assurance Framework’ (QTC FA Review) that reviews the FA regime in Queensland and across many jurisdictions, and provides a recommended solution for Queensland known as the ‘Tailored Solution’;
  3. The Queensland Government’s discussion paper ‘Financial Assurance Framework Reform’ (FA Discussion Paper) which further considers the QTC’s Tailored Solution and seeks public comment on the recommendation; and
  4. The Queensland Government’s discussion paper ‘Better Mine Rehabilitation for Queensland’ (Rehabilitation Discussion Paper), describing the new and improved obligations on resource companies to rehabilitate land post closure, in conjunction with the FA reforms.

This paper aims to provide  detailed analysis regarding the proposed changes to Queensland's FA regime, with specific consideration of the operation of the new pooled rehabilitation funds and the expansion of products available to provide third party surety for FA obligations.

To read the full atricle click here, or visit

Contact: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.


Through amendments introduced since last year to the Electricity Market License Regulation (“Licensed Generation Regulation”)[1] and the Regulation on Unlicensed Electricity Generation on Electricity Market (“Unlicensed Generation Regulation”)[2] followed by the new Regulation on Renewable Energy Resource Areas (“Renewables Zone Regulation”)[3] a new legal road map on licensed and unlicensed energy investments is in the making. In this article, amendments to the legislation concerning energy investments and significant amendments are addressed.

Read more: Key Amendments to Regulation on Licensed and Unlicensed Electricity and New Regulation on...

Authors: Bronwyn Clarkson & Kelly Pain

After a 10 year application process and the longest case in Land Court history, the court this week recommended that the applications for permits associated with the $900 million New Acland Stage 3 expansion be refused.

The decision turned primarily on the potential impacts of the project on groundwater resources, with Member Smith stating clearly:

'Groundwater considerations are such that the revised Stage 3 project should not proceed given the risks to the surrounding landholders and the poor state of the current model.'

Groundwater considerations have certainly been front of mind for proponents, given the recent legislative changes in this space (for further detail, please see previous Carter Newell Energy & Resources newsletters, including ‘Water reforms now in full swing – are you compliant?’). This decision draws these issues into clearer focus for those directly affected and particularly those facing impending approval processes where groundwater impacts are to be addressed.

Read more here.