GOTAP Pty Ltd v Skelton

Case [2022] QLC 16


LAND COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:  GOTAP Pty Ltd v Skelton [2022] QLC 16
PARTIES:

GOTAP Pty Ltd
(applicant)

v

Christopher Skelton
(respondent)

FILE NO: MRA016-22
PROCEEDING: Determination of compensation payable for renewal of mining lease
DELIVERED ON: 31 October 2022
DELIVERED AT: Brisbane
HEARD ON: Submissions closed 8 September 2022
HEARD AT: Heard on the papers
MEMBER: JR McNamara
ORDERS:

In respect of the application for renewal of ML 95585, compensation is determined as follows:

1.     Fifty-Five Dollars ($55) per annum representing the diminution of the use made or which may be made of the land ($50 plus 10%);

2.     Fifty-Five Dollars ($55) per annum in biosecurity inspection costs, indexed annually to CPI ($50 plus 10%); and

3.     The applicant must pay the amount set out in order 1 and 2 to the respondent within one (1) month of the date of the grant of the renewal of ML 95585 by the Department of Resources, and then annually on the date of the grant of the renewal of ML 95585 by the Department of Resources.

CATCHWORDS:

ENERGY AND RESOURCES – MINERALS – MINING FOR MINERALS – COMPENSATION – where the applicant had applied for the renewal of a mining lease situated on the land of the respondent – whether and, if so, what compensation was payable under s 281 of the Mineral Resources Act 1989

Mineral Resources Act 1989 s 281

Summerville v Skelton [2022] QLC 7, cited

Valentine v Henry [2018] QLC 21, cited

APPEARANCES: Not applicable

[1]Raymond Jackson is an opal miner. He holds two mining leases through his company, GOTAP Pty Ltd, on Elvo Station, a pastoral station owned by Christopher Skelton. ML 95585 (the ML) was first granted in 2009 and was due to expire on 31 May 2019. Mr Jackson has applied to renew the ML for a further 10 years.

[2]Before the renewal can be granted, compensation with the landowner of Elvo Station must be agreed or determined by the Land Court.[1] The parties were unable to agree compensation.  For the reasons that follow I have determined that compensation is payable for the diminished use that Mr Skelton will have in the ML area, and some associated expenses.  

[1]Mineral Resources Act 1989 s 281.

The Lease

[3]The area of the ML is 13.91 ha. It is. located towards the eastern part of Elvo Station about 128km south of Winton. To the north is ML 95305, which is also held by GOTAP Pty Ltd. There is a 3 km access track which runs south-east from the ML to Jundah Road.

[4]There is little information of assistance concerning the operation of the ML.  In his compensation statement Mr Jackson says:

“Except for the immediate excavation, Mr Skelton’s cattle have access to all other areas of the lease including two large excavations filled with water and left open at the written permission of the previous owner …

Regular maintenance and upkeep of the 3 kilometres of access road to the lease from the…

Continue reading GOTAP Pty Ltd v Skelton

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
GOTAP Pty Ltd v Skelton [2022] QLC 16
Case
[2022] QLC 16
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of GOTAP Pty Ltd v Skelton involved a dispute between the applicant, GOTAP Pty Ltd, and the respondent, Skelton, concerning the renewal of a mining lease under s 281 of the Mineral Resources Act 1989. The applicant sought to renew a mining lease situated on the respondent's land, and the primary issue was whether any compensation was payable to the respondent under the Act.

The primary legal issue before the court was the calculation of compensation, if any, for the renewal of the mining lease. The court had to consider the statutory provisions of s 281, which set out the compensation framework for mining lease renewals, and determine the appropriate compensation amount payable to the respondent for the use of their land. The court needed to balance the rights of the mining company to continue operations with the rights of the landowner to be compensated for the use of their land.

The court considered the statutory provisions and decided that compensation was payable under s 281. The court determined that the compensation should consist of the diminution of the use made or which may be made of the land, as well as biosecurity inspection costs, both indexed annually to the Consumer Price Index. The compensation amount was set at $55 per annum for each category, totalling $110 per annum. The court further ordered that the applicant must pay the compensation amount to the respondent within one month of the grant of the renewal of the mining lease by the Department of Resources, and then annually on the date of the grant of the renewal.

Orders

Orders of the court

In respect of the application for renewal of ML 95585, compensation is determined as follows:

1. Fifty-Five Dollars ($55) per annum representing the diminution of the use made or which may be made of the land ($50 plus 10%);

2. Fifty-Five Dollars ($55) per annum in biosecurity inspection costs, indexed annually to CPI ($50 plus 10%); and

3. The applicant must pay the amount set out in order 1 and 2 to the respondent within one (1) month of the date of the grant of the renewal of ML 95585 by the Department of Resources, and then annually on the date of the grant of the renewal of ML 95585 by the Department of Resources.

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.