Re: CENTURY METALS AND MINING NL
And: ROBERT J YEOMANS, THE LIQUIDATOR OF THE PHOSPHATE MINING
CORPORATION OF CHRISTMAS ISLAND and THE MINISTER FOR ARTS AND
TERRITORIES
No. WA G25 of 1989
FED No. 383
Administrative Law
100 ALR 383
(1989) 40 FCR 564
COURT
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION
Fisher(1), Wilcox(1) and Spender(1) JJ.
CATCHWORDS
Administrative Law - Winding up of Commonwealth mining operation - Selection of private operator to take over Commonwealth assets and to commence mining - Promise by Minister of independent, impartial and thorough inquiry - Liquidator of Commonwealth company appointed to enquire - Whether liquidation inquiry constituted an independent, impartial and thorough inquiry - Natural justice - Proper exercise of Court's discretion as to setting aside decisions.
Phosphate Mining Corporation of Christmas Island (Winding Up) Ordinance 1987 ss.10, 14, 15, 58, 59.
Lands Ordinance 1987 (Christmas Island) s.5.
Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977, s.5, 16.
HEARING
SYDNEY
#DATE 25:7:1989
Counsel for the Appellant: Mr R J Ellicott QC with
Mr R L Le Miere
Solicitors for the Appellant: Mallesons Stephen Jaques
Counsel for the First
Respondent: Mr D G Williamson QC with
Mr A L Cavanough
Solicitors for the First
Respondent: Sly & Weigall
Counsel for the Second
Respondent: Mr D Williams QC with Mr P. Macliver
Solicitors for the Second
Respondent: Australian Government Solicitor
ORDER
The appeal be allowed.
The orders made by French J on 23 March 1989 be set aside and in lieu thereof it be ordered that:
(a) the decision of the first respondent to make the recommendations contained in his report to the second respondent dated 23 May 1988 be set aside;
(b) the decision of the second respondent of 1 July 1988 to commence negotiations with Elders Resources Limited about recommencing mining on Christmas Island be set aside;
(c) the matter of mining on Christmas Island be remitted to the second respondent for further consideration; and
(d) the respondents pay to the applicants their costs of the proceeding.
The respondents pay to the appellant its costs of the appeal.
Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
JUDGE1
This is an appeal against a decision of a Judge of the Court (French J) dismissing an application for review, made under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977, of various decisions made by Robert J Yeomans, the first respondent, and the Minister for Arts and Territories, the second respondent. Mr Yeomans is the liquidator of an entity known as Phosphate Mining Corporation of Christmas Island ("PMCI").
The applicants, at first instance, were Century Metals and Mining NL ("Century") and The Union of Christmas Island Workers ("UCIW"). Both applicants appealed against the dismissal of their application but, a day or two before the commencement of the hearing of the appeal, UCIW discontinued its appeal. The appeal by Century was maintained and fully argued.
The proceedings at first instanceThe hearing at first instance was…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Century Metals and Mining NL v Yeomans 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
- [1989] FCA 383
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues central to the case revolved around the nature and adequacy of the inquiry conducted by the liquidator appointed to examine the winding up of the Commonwealth company. The plaintiffs argued that the liquidator's inquiry failed to meet the standards of independence, impartiality, and thoroughness promised by the Minister. This raised questions about the proper exercise of the Court's discretion in setting aside decisions that do not adhere to these principles. Additionally, the fairness of the process, particularly in light of the doctrine of natural justice, was a critical concern.
The Court found that the liquidator's inquiry did not meet the requisite standards of independence, impartiality, and thoroughness. It was determined that the liquidator had potential conflicts of interest and did not fully explore all relevant issues. The Court held that the process did not comply with the principles of natural justice. Consequently, the Court exercised its discretion to set aside the decisions made by the respondents, including the liquidator's report and the Minister's decision to negotiate with Elders Resources Limited. The matter was remitted back to the Minister for reconsideration.
The orders made by the Court were definitive in addressing the deficiencies identified. The decision of the liquidator to make recommendations to the Minister was set aside, as was the Minister's decision to commence negotiations with Elders Resources Limited. The Court also ordered that the matter of mining on Christmas Island be remitted to the Minister for further consideration. Furthermore, the respondents were directed to pay the applicants' costs of the proceeding and the appellant's costs of the appeal. This comprehensive ruling aimed to ensure that the selection process for the private operator would be conducted in a manner that met the standards of fairness and due process.
Orders
Orders of the court
The appeal be allowed.
The orders made by French J on 23 March 1989 be set aside and in lieu thereof it be ordered that:
(a) the decision of the first respondent to make the recommendations contained in his report to the second respondent dated 23 May 1988 be set aside;
(b) the decision of the second respondent of 1 July 1988 to commence negotiations with Elders Resources Limited about recommencing mining on Christmas Island be set aside;
(c) the matter of mining on Christmas Island be remitted to the second respondent for further consideration; and
(d) the respondents pay to the applicants their costs of the proceeding.
The respondents pay to the appellant its costs of the appeal.
Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
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.