Broken Hill Cobalt Project Pty Ltd v Lord

Broken Hill Cobalt Project Pty Ltd (the appellants) held exploration licences over land that formed part of Thackaringa Station, where the respondents conducted sheep farming. The title to Thackaringa Station comprised freehold and leasehold titles, with the leasehold being Crown leases that permitted surface use solely for grazing. The appellants' exploration licences were confined to the Crown leasehold land. The appellants sought an access arrangement under section 140 of the *Mining Act 1992* (NSW), and the respondents applied for a review of the arbitrator's decision under section 155 of the same Act. The appeal concerned the arbitrator's decision regarding access and compensation.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the arbitrator had erred in law in determining the scope of compensable losses under the *Mining Act 1992* (NSW) and whether the arbitrator's reasons for their decision were adequate, raising questions of procedural fairness. Specifically, the court had to consider the heads of compensable loss that could be claimed by the landowners in relation to the exploration activities.

The Court of Appeal found that the arbitrator had made errors in law regarding the quantification of compensation. While acknowledging the arbitrator's findings on certain compensable losses, the court determined that the reasoning provided was insufficient to justify the exclusion of other potential heads of loss. The court applied principles of statutory interpretation to the *Mining Act 1992* (NSW) and principles of administrative law concerning the adequacy of reasons and procedural fairness.

The appeal was allowed in part. The matter was remitted to the primary judge for the quantification of compensation payable by the appellants for the compensable losses identified in the primary judgment. The costs of the appeal were reserved, with parties directed to file written submissions on costs.