Benny v Warby

John Bernard Benny Marie, the holder of mining lease number 60157, applied to the Land Court of Queensland for the determination of compensation for the renewal of the lease. The respondents, A.H. Warby and J.E. Warby, are the owners of Raymore Station, through which access to the lease is provided. The lease, which covers an area of 6 hectares and is intended for opal mining, was initially granted for a period of 10 years, beginning on 1 January 1995, and Benny applied for its renewal for another 5 years on 17 May 2004. Both parties failed to provide any valuation evidence as required by the Tribunal Practice Direction, and their correspondence did not meaningfully address the criteria set out in s 281 of the Mineral Resources Act 1989.

The primary legal issue before the court was to determine the appropriate compensation payable for the renewal of the mining lease, considering the lack of compliance by either party with the Tribunal's Practice Direction. The applicant proposed compensation between $5 and $15 per hectare per year, while the respondents sought $50 per hectare per year. The court needed to consider the previous determinations and agreements in the Quilpie area and the consistency of compensation determinations involving similar operations in the same mining districts.

The court found that a consistent approach to compensation determinations is in the interest of both miners and landholders. It adopted the methodology applied by the Mining Referee Windridge in a similar case, Re Doroshenko v Rayment [2006] QLRT 37. The court assessed compensation based on $15 per annum per hectare for the term of the lease, adding $30 for access and $48 for other considerations, resulting in a total award of $528.00. The court ordered the applicant to pay this amount to the respondents within two months from notification of the renewal of the mining lease by the Mining Registrar.