Alphadale Pty Ltd v Dore & Ors

Case [2016] QLC 15


LAND COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Alphadale Pty Ltd  v Dore and Ors [2016] QLC 15

 PARTIES: Alphadale Pty Ltd 
(applicant)
v
MJ Dore, GF & EA Lyons, DJ & MA Turley, RJ Mann and Atkinson Developments
(respondents)
 FILE NO:
MRA112-15
 PROCEEDINGS: Determination of compensation payable for renewal of mining lease.
 DELIVERED ON: 26 February 2016
 DELIVERED AT: Brisbane
 HEARD ON: Submissions closed 3 July 2015
 HEARD AT: Heard on the papers
JUDICIAL REGISTRAR:

GJ Smith

 ORDERS:

1.       In respect of ML 10175 compensation is determined in the total sum of $2700.00 per annum for the first year and that sum as adjusted in accordance with the Consumer Price Index in each subsequent year of the tenure.

2.       The miner pay compensation to the landowners the amount set out in order 1 within three months from notification of the renewal of the mining lease by the Department of Natural Resources and Mines and thereafter annually on the anniversary of the renewal of the mining lease.

CATCHWORDS:

MINING LEASE – renewal – access – determination of compensation – use of Court judgments for determination purposes.

Mineral Resources Act 1989 ss 279A, 281

Alphadale Pty Ltd v Dore & Ors [2014] QLC 25
Unimin Australia Limited v Freeman [2007] QLC 0076

Wills v Minerva Coal Pty Ltd [No.2] (1998) 19 QLCR 297

APPEARANCES:

Not applicable

  1. These proceedings concern a referral to the Land Court by the Chief Executive, Department of Natural Resources and Mines (DNRM) pursuant to s 279A of the Mineral Resources Act 1989 (MRA) for the determination of compensation in respect of the grant of Mining Lease 10175.  

Background

  1. The applicant, Alphadale Pty Ltd (the miner) seeks the grant of a mining lease located on land described as Lot 602 on PH1444 when the referral documents were lodged with the Land Court which subsequently has changed to Lot 1 on SP272205.  The Mining Lease comprises an approximate 305 ha mining area and a 5.3 km access track across land owned by the respondents MJ Dore, GF & EA Lyons, DJ & MA Turley, RJ Mann and Atkinson Developments (the landowners).

  2. The property is located in the Charters Towers Regional Council local government area and is used for grazing purposes. 

  3. The specific Land Court reference and tenure details are set out as follows:  

Court Reference Tenure ID Area Term Lease Purpose
MRA112-15 10175 305 ha 9 years Gold-Silver

Relevant Legislation

  1. Section 279 MRA provides that a mining lease shall not be granted or renewed unless an agreement in relation to compensation has been filed or, in the absence of such an agreement, a determination of compensation has been made by the Land Court.  In this matter, no agreement has been lodged with DNRM and the matter has been referred to the Land Court for determination.

  2. Section 281 MRA identifies the matters which must be considered by the Court when determining compensation. In particular, s 281(3)(a) provides that an owner of land is entitled to compensation for:

    “(i)     deprivation of possession of the…

Continue reading Alphadale Pty Ltd v Dore & Ors

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Alphadale Pty Ltd v Dore & Ors [2016] QLC 15
Case
[2016] QLC 15
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Alphadale Pty Ltd brought an action against Dore and others, contesting the determination of compensation for the renewal of a mining lease over their land. The dispute was heard in the Queensland Land Court. The crux of the matter was the assessment of compensation for the continued use of the property under the renewed mining lease, as well as the appropriate method for determining this compensation. The landowners sought a higher compensation amount than that determined by the Department of Natural Resources and Mines.

The court was tasked with deciding whether the Department's determination of compensation was correct, and if not, what the appropriate compensation should be. Additionally, the court had to determine whether it was appropriate to use previous court judgments as a basis for determining compensation in this case. The landowners argued that the use of previous judgments was not suitable due to differences in the nature of the land and the mining activities involved.

The court found that the Department's determination of compensation was incorrect. It held that the use of previous court judgments was not an appropriate method for determining compensation in this instance due to the unique circumstances of the land and the mining activities. Instead, the court calculated compensation based on the specific facts of this case, determining it to be $2700.00 per annum for the first year, with subsequent annual adjustments based on the Consumer Price Index. The court ordered that the miner pay this sum to the landowners within three months of the lease renewal notification and annually thereafter.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. In respect of ML 10175 compensation is determined in the total sum of $2700.00 per annum for the first year and that sum as adjusted in accordance with the Consumer Price Index in each subsequent year of the tenure.

2. The miner pay compensation to the landowners the amount set out in order 1 within three months from notification of the renewal of the mining lease by the Department of Natural Resources and Mines and thereafter annually on the anniversary of the renewal of the mining lease.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.