LAND COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CITATION: Burtenshaw & Anor v Tablelands Regional Council
[2016] QLC 68PARTIES: Garry Frederick Burtenshaw & Rosemary Anne Burtenshaw
(applicants)
v
Tablelands Regional Council
(respondent)FILE NO: MRA238-16 DIVISION: General Division PROCEEDING: Determination of compensation for renewal of mining lease. DELIVERED ON: 10 November 2016 DELIVERED AT: Brisbane HEARD ON: Submissions closed 5 September 2016 HEARD AT: Heard on the papers JUDICIAL REGISTRAR: GJ Smith
ORDERS: 1. Compensation is determined in the total sum of Two Hundred and Forty Dollars ($240.00).
2. The applicants are to pay compensation to the respondent the amount set out in Order 1 hereof within two (2) months of the renewal of Mining Lease 4342 by the Department of Natural Resources and Mines.
CATCHWORDS: MINING LEASE – renewal – referral – access – determination of compensation – absence of expert or valuation evidence – use of Court judgments for determination purposes.
Mineral Resources Act 1989, s 279A
Unimin Australia Limited v Freeman [2007] QLC 76
Burtenshaw v Mudge [2015] QLC 1
Burtenshaw & Anor v Burtenshaw & Ors [2015] QLC 31
APPEARANCES: Not applicable Background
This matter involves a referral to the Land Court pursuant to s 279A of the Mineral Resources Act 1989 (MRA) for the determination of compensation in respect of the renewal of Mining Lease 4342 (ML 4342).
On 8 May 2015, Garry Frederick Burtenshaw and Rosemary Anne Burtenshaw (the miners) applied for the renewal of ML 4342 over land located approximately 10 km north of Mount Garnett in the Mareeba Mining District. The land is within the Tableland Regional Council local government area. Further renewal is sought for a period of 21 years. The purpose of the proposed renewal is for the mining of tin.
Mapping data supplied by the Department of Natural Resources and Mines (DNRM) indicates that approximately 0.8 ha of ML 4342 is situated upon a road reserve under the control of the Tablelands Regional Council (the respondent). The area of 0.8 ha will be rounded to 1 ha for calculation purposes.
Relevant Legislation
Section 279 of the 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 the DNRM and the matter has been referred to the Land Court for determination.
Section 281 of the 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 surface of land of the owner;
(ii)diminution of the value of the land of the owner or any improvements thereon;
(iii)diminution of the use made or which may be made of the land of the owner or any improvements thereon;
(iv)severance of any part of the land from other parts thereof or from other…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Burtenshaw v Tablelands Regional Council and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2016] QLC 68
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues in this case centred around the procedural fairness of the council's process for determining compensation, the proper valuation of the mining lease, and the use of previous court judgments in determining compensation. The applicants argued that the council's process for determining compensation was not fair and that the valuation of the mining lease was incorrect. They also contended that the council should have sought expert evidence to determine the value of the mining lease.
The tribunal found that the council's process for determining compensation was procedurally fair and that the valuation of the mining lease was correct. The tribunal also found that it was appropriate to use previous court judgments in determining compensation, as there was no expert or valuation evidence before it. The tribunal determined that the compensation for the renewal of the mining lease should be $240.
The tribunal ordered that compensation in the total sum of Two Hundred and Forty Dollars ($240.00) be paid by the applicants to the respondent within two (2) months of the renewal of Mining Lease 4342 by the Department of Natural Resources and Mines.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. Compensation is determined in the total sum of Two Hundred and Forty Dollars ($240.00).
2. The applicants are to pay compensation to the respondent the amount set out in Order 1 hereof within two (2) months of the renewal of Mining Lease 4342 by the Department of Natural Resources and Mines.
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.