TLG - Media, page-12844

It's also worth nothing that the Supreme Administrative Court is a precedential court only. They will only grant leave to appeal to provide guidance on legal issues and if there is a need for a legal precedent, or if there are extroadinary reasons. They don't consider the the merits of the case or whether the lower courts have made the right outcome.

This is why the number of appeals granted is so low.

If the Court of Appeal agrees with the Land and Environment Court then chances of a successful appeal to the Supreme Administrative Court would have to be next to none.

I did also see on the anti-Talga Facebook group that they were getting an environmental consultant in to do another inventory of the area, and had found a wasp hadn't been included in Talga's inventory. If this is their argument for appeal then it doesn't seem very strong to me. By their own admission the wasp is probably found in many places in Nunasvaara as well.

"Need for guidance (precedence)

The Court’s task is to provide guidance on legal issues on which government authorities and administrative courts and administrative courts of appeal throughout the country require direction.

This is distinct from the administrative courts and administrative courts of appeal which must determine whether the cases received by them have the right outcome. A central consideration in a decision to grant leave to appeal in a case is whether or not there is a need for legal precedent regarding the question involved in the case. Thus, the question in the case must concern a legal issue on which government authorities and courts require guidance.

The Supreme Administrative Court may have a basis for granting leave to appeal due to the lack of precedent or an inconsistency in the case law of the administrative courts of appeal because the various courts have reached different conclusions regarding a certain issue.

The task of the Supreme Administrative Court of providing guidance on legal issues may make the question of which evidentiary requirements are to be generally applied in a certain type of case interesting for precedential purposes but not, however, the question of whether an individual person or government authority meets the evidentiary requirement in a particular case."

"Extraordinary reasons

In addition to situations in which guidance is necessary on a certain question, the Supreme Administrative Court may also grant leave to appeal in other cases, namely when there are extraordinary reasons for doing so. Extraordinary reasons for granting leave to appeal may be that the outcome in the administrative court of appeal is due to a grave omission or a mistake which is not related to the legal examination. This may involve, for example, situations in which the court has applied the wrong law or a decision has been taken by someone who does not have the authority to do so. Leave to appeal based on extraordinary reasons is so rare that it is granted only a few times per year."