FORREST & FORREST PTY LTD -v- WILSON [2016] WASCA 116

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2016] WASCA 116
Court:	THE COURT OF APPEAL (WA)
Case No:	CACV:96/2015	Heard:	9 FEBRUARY 2016
Coram:	McLURE P NEWNES JA MURPHY JA	Delivered:	7/07/16
No of pages:	17	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Appeal dismissed
Category:	A
PDF Version

Parties:	FORREST & FORREST PTY LTD STEPHEN McKENZIE WILSON YARRI MINING PTY LTD QUARRY PARK LTD ONSLOW RESOURCES LTD
Catchwords:	Mining law Proper construction of s 74, s 74A and s 75 of Mining Act 1978 (WA) Meaning of 'accompanied by' in s 74(1) Whether lodgement of documents specified in s 74(1)(ca)(ii) a jurisdictional fact or a condition of validity Whether failure to lodge mining operations statement a mandatory relevant consideration
Legislation:	Mining Act 1978 (WA), s 71, s 74, s 74A, s 75, s 105A, s 111A, s 116(2) Mining Amendment Act 2012 (WA) Mining Regulations 1981 (WA), r 25AA, r 64A(1), r 146
Case References:	Hot Holdings Pty Ltd v Creasy (1996) 16 WAR 428 Parisienne Basket Shoes Pty Ltd v Whyte [1938] HCA 7; (1938) 59 CLR 369 Project Blue Sky Inc v Australian Broadcasting Authority [1998] HCA 28; (1998) 194 CLR 355 Tasker v Fullwood (1978) 1 NSWLR 20 Yarri Mining Pty Ltd v Eaglefield Holdings Pty Ltd (2010) 41 WAR 134 Yarri v Forrest & Forrest Pty Ltd [2014] WAMW 6

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : THE COURT OF APPEAL (WA) CITATION : FORREST & FORREST PTY LTD -v- WILSON [2016] WASCA 116 CORAM : McLURE P

NEWNES JA

MURPHY JA

HEARD : 9 FEBRUARY 2016 DELIVERED : 7 JULY 2016 FILE NO/S : CACV 96 of 2015 BETWEEN : FORREST & FORREST PTY LTD

Appellant

AND

STEPHEN McKENZIE WILSON

First Respondent

YARRI MINING PTY LTD

Second Respondent

QUARRY PARK LTD

Third Respondent

ONSLOW RESOURCES LTD

Fourth Respondent

ON APPEAL FROM:

Jurisdiction : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Coram : ALLANSON J

Citation : FORREST & FORREST PTY LTD -v- WILSON [2015] WASC 181

File No : CIV 2054 of 2014

Catchwords:

Mining law - Proper construction of s 74, s 74A and s 75 of Mining Act 1978 (WA) - Meaning of 'accompanied by' in s 74(1) - Whether lodgement of documents specified in s 74(1)(ca)(ii) a jurisdictional fact or a condition of validity - Whether failure to lodge mining operations statement a mandatory relevant consideration

Legislation:

Mining Act 1978 (WA), s 71, s 74, s 74A, s 75, s 105A, s 111A, s 116(2)

Mining Amendment Act 2012 (WA)
Mining Regulations 1981 (WA), r 25AA, r 64A(1), r 146

Result:

Appeal dismissed

Category: A

Representation:

Counsel:

Appellant : Mr S K Dharmananda SC & Mr A J Papamatheos

First Respondent : No appearance

Second Respondent : No appearance

Third Respondent : No appearance

Fourth Respondent : No appearance

Solicitors:

Appellant : Mizen & Mizen

First Respondent : No appearance

Second Respondent : No appearance

Third Respondent…

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 Forrest & Forrest Pty Ltd v Wilson 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: [2016] WASCA 116
Decision Date: 7 JULY 2016

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Forrest & Forrest Pty Ltd v Wilson, the parties were contesting the interpretation of sections 74, 74A, and 75 of the Mining Act 1978 (WA). The dispute centred around the legal requirements for the lodgement of a mining operations statement, and whether the failure to do so was a jurisdictional defect or a condition of validity. The case was heard and determined by the Supreme Court of Western Australia.

The primary legal issues before the court involved the proper construction of the statutory provisions, specifically the interpretation of the phrase "accompanied by" in section 74(1) and the consequences of failing to lodge the required documents as specified in section 74(1)(ca)(ii). The court had to determine whether the lodgement of a mining operations statement was a jurisdictional fact or merely a condition of validity, and if the failure to lodge such documents was a mandatory consideration in decision-making processes.

The court considered the language of the Act and relevant legislative history to ascertain the intent of the legislature. It concluded that the lodgement of the required documents was not a jurisdictional fact but rather a condition of validity. Furthermore, the court held that the failure to lodge the mining operations statement was not a mandatory consideration that must be taken into account when making decisions under the Act.

As a result of the court's findings, the appeal was dismissed, affirming the decisions made by the lower court and upholding the statutory interpretation as determined.

Orders

Orders of the court

Appeal dismissed

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.