the statement is ignorance of the law is not an excuse....i.e "i didn't know i couldn't steal all the money as there wasn't a sign saying dont steal money". it doesn't apply to consultation processes. It actually hurts AGR, as the claimant is saying AGR ignored the law and failed to consult. Unfortunately, the onus is on AGR to demonstrate it made dedicated efforts to consult, consider and incorporate community feedback... otherwise companys would just stand on a random corner and whisper "we're going to bulldoze the whole area does anyone care? oh good, no objections!".....
Now if they can demonstrate they made these attempts and due consideration was given but the suing party changed their mind, was absent, or afterwards went and spoke to a voodoo guru who said the cows will be angry... then it'll be thrown out as you don't get multiple bites of the cherry.
