Carpentaria Gold Pty Ltd v Hood - [2015] QLC 36

LAND COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION: Carpentaria Gold Pty Ltd v Hood [2015] QLC 36

PARTIES: Carpentaria Gold Pty Ltd
(applicant)

v

Anthony Gordon Hood and June Heather Hood
(respondents)

FILE NO: MRA188-12

DIVISION: General

PROCEEDING: An application for leave to adduce further expert evidence.

DELIVERED ON: 8 September 2015

DELIVERED AT: Brisbane

HEARD ON: 28 April 2015

HEARD AT: Brisbane

MEMBER: WL Cochrane

ORDERS:
1. The application is allowed.

2. The respondent is granted leave to adduce further evidence from three additional expert witnesses namely the valuer Mr Geoffrey William Eales, the hydrogeologist Mr Errol Haydn Briese and the veterinary consultant Dr David Keith Rendell.

CATCHWORDS:
Mining Lease – Determination of Compensation – Mineral Resources Act 1989 s 281.

Practice and Procedure – Application to rely upon evidence of second and an additional expert after without prejudice conclave conducted agreement reached between experts disposing of question of compensation.

Considerations – case management, justice as between the parties – balancing considerations.

Costs implications.

AONRisk Services Australia Limited v Australian National University [2009] HCA 27.

CH4 Pty Ltd v The Minister for Natural Resources, Mines and Energy and Minister for Trade [2010] QLC 0037.

Conias Hotels Pty Ltd v Murphy & Anor [2012] QSC 297.

D v S [2009] QSC 446.

Gallo v Department of Environment and Resource Management (No. 2) [2014] QLAC 11.

Lucantonio v Kleinert [2009] NSWSC 853.

State of Queensland & Anor v JL Holdings Pty Ltd (1997) 189 CLR 146.

Toan Van Pham & Ors v Brisbane City Council [2011] QLC 0038.

APPEARANCES: Mr T Palmer of counsel appearing for Carpentaria Gold Pty Ltd

Mr PJ Dunning QC and Mr DA Quayle of counsel appearing for the respondents

Background

Mining Lease 10170 is held by Carpentaria Gold Pty Ltd. The lease forms part of the gold mining project described as the Ravenswood Project. This matter arises out of a referral by the Mining Registrar at Charters Towers of an application for renewal of a mining lease.
ML 10170 lies over Redcliff Station at Middlemount which property is owned, pursuant to an operational licence OL77 and OL78, by Anthony Hood and June Hood who use the property for grazing.
The applicant Carpentaria Gold Pty Ltd, by an application made on 23 July 2011 seeks renewal of lease ML 10170 over an area of 362.6431 ha for nine years.
The matter of compensation between the parties was unable to be agreed and on 20 April 2012 the matter was referred by the Mining Registrar to this Court pursuant to s 279A of the Mineral Resources Act 1989 (MRA) because compensation had not been determined within 3 months after the term of the lease notionally ended.
Initially the respondents were represented by Rees R and Sydney Jones, a Rockhampton firm of solicitors.
During the time of that representation and in accordance the statutory requirements the respondents filed a compensation statement on 13 November 2014. That compensation statement was prepared by and lodged…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Carpentaria Gold Pty Ltd v Hood 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

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2015] QLC 36
Decision Date: 8 September 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Carpentaria Gold Pty Ltd sought to challenge the determination of compensation for a mining lease under the Mineral Resources Act 1989, contesting the amount set by the Administrator. Hood, the respondent, applied to introduce additional expert evidence post a without prejudice meeting between experts, which resulted in an agreement on the compensation amount. The court was tasked with determining whether Hood's application to rely on evidence from two additional experts and one more expert, after reaching an agreement in the without prejudice conclave, should be allowed. The central issue was whether such evidence could be presented despite the usual constraints on amending pleadings and the balance of considerations in managing the case.

The court considered the established principle that without prejudice communications should be privileged and generally inadmissible. However, it acknowledged that in exceptional circumstances, such evidence could be allowed if it was necessary to achieve justice between the parties. Here, the court found that the circumstances warranted an exception due to the agreement reached between experts, which disposed of the compensation question. The court also noted the importance of case management and achieving a fair outcome for both parties. Given these considerations, the court allowed Hood's application to present additional expert evidence.

As a result of the court's decision, Hood was granted permission to call three additional expert witnesses, including Mr Geoffrey William Eales, Mr Errol Haydn Briese, and Dr David Keith Rendell. The court's ruling balanced the principles of case management and ensuring justice between the parties, allowing the presentation of the agreed-upon compensation evidence from the additional experts.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The application is allowed.

2. The respondent is granted leave to adduce further evidence from three additional expert witnesses namely the valuer Mr Geoffrey William Eales, the hydrogeologist Mr Errol Haydn Briese and the veterinary consultant Dr David Keith Rendell.

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.

CITATION:	Carpentaria Gold Pty Ltd v Hood [2015] QLC 36
PARTIES:	Carpentaria Gold Pty Ltd (applicant)
v
Anthony Gordon Hood and June Heather Hood (respondents)
FILE NO:	MRA188-12
DIVISION:	General
PROCEEDING:	An application for leave to adduce further expert evidence.
DELIVERED ON:	8 September 2015
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARD ON:	28 April 2015
HEARD AT:	Brisbane
MEMBER:	WL Cochrane
ORDERS:	1. The application is allowed. 2. The respondent is granted leave to adduce further evidence from three additional expert witnesses namely the valuer Mr Geoffrey William Eales, the hydrogeologist Mr Errol Haydn Briese and the veterinary consultant Dr David Keith Rendell.
CATCHWORDS:	Mining Lease – Determination of Compensation – Mineral Resources Act 1989 s 281. Practice and Procedure – Application to rely upon evidence of second and an additional expert after without prejudice conclave conducted agreement reached between experts disposing of question of compensation. Considerations – case management, justice as between the parties – balancing considerations. Costs implications. AONRisk Services Australia Limited v Australian National University [2009] HCA 27. CH4 Pty Ltd v The Minister for Natural Resources, Mines and Energy and Minister for Trade [2010] QLC 0037. Conias Hotels Pty Ltd v Murphy & Anor [2012] QSC 297. D v S [2009] QSC 446. Gallo v Department of Environment and Resource Management (No. 2) [2014] QLAC 11. Lucantonio v Kleinert [2009] NSWSC 853. State of Queensland & Anor v JL Holdings Pty Ltd (1997) 189 CLR 146. Toan Van Pham & Ors v Brisbane City Council [2011] QLC 0038.
APPEARANCES:	Mr T Palmer of counsel appearing for Carpentaria Gold Pty Ltd
Mr PJ Dunning QC and Mr DA Quayle of counsel appearing for the respondents