Against my expectations, a New South Wales court has found negligence proved in the class action against the operators of Wivenhoe dam in the 2011 floods.
Of course, I don't know the exact detail of the evidence presented, but what always seemed fishy to me was the complexity of modelling, compiled from overseas, to show what level of flooding would have happened following different release patterns.
From memory, the modelling didn't even show that earlier releases would have guaranteed no flooding, just reduced heights. If so, it should not be as if every house flooded deserves compensation - it should only be those in which flooding reached above the level that would have happened under the best scenario. But maybe the judgement incorporates that?
I will be curious to see whether the litigants end up happy with the final results, or indeed, whether there might be an appeal. The problem is, with an election looming, State Labor probably does not want to appear to be the one holding up "justice", even if there is doubt about the weighting given to conflicting expert evidence.
Update: I wrote (surprisingly extensively!) about the details of flood levels discussed at the inquiry into the dam operation back in 2012. It should be clear from that why I was extremely dubious of a court win on the negligence case.
No comments:
Post a Comment