Hancock Coal Pty Ltd v Cassoni (No. 5) - [2014] QLC 33

LAND COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION: Hancock Coal Pty Ltd v Cassoni (No. 5) [2014] QLC 33

PARTIES:
Hancock Coal Pty Ltd
(applicant)

v

Fiorella Paola Cassoni
(objector)

FILE NOs: MRA082-13
EPA083-13

DIVISION: General Division

PROCEEDING: Application by objector for costs

DELIVERED ON: 24 October 2014

DELIVERED AT: Brisbane

HEARD ON: Heard on the papers
Submissions closed 20 May 2014

HEARD AT: Brisbane

ACTING PRESIDENT: PA Smith

ORDERS:
1. Hancock Coal Pty Ltd pay 50% of Ms Cassoni’s costs to be agreed, or failing agreement, to be assessed.

2. Subject to any restrictions that may be applied to Ms Cassoni’s costs on assessment, Ms Cassoni be paid 50% of her costs on the standard basis.

CATCHWORDS:
Mineral Resources Act 1989
Environmental Protection Act 1994
Land Court Act 2000
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999

COSTS – s 34 Land Court Act 2000 – objections to mining lease application and associated environmental authority – factors governing exercise of discretion – unfettered discretions – reasonableness of parties – whether objection raised in the public interest – application for costs allowed in part

Anson Holdings Pty Ltd v Wallace & Anor (No. 2) (2010) 31 QLCR 130
Donovan v Struber & Ors (No. 4) [2013] QLC 14
Dunn v Burtenshaw & Ors (2011) 32 QLCR 270
Gregcarbil Pty Ltd v Backus & Ors (No. 2) (2013) 34 QLCR 253
Hancock Coal Pty Ltd v Kelly & Ors and Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (No. 4) [2014] QLC 12
Mayton v Kennett [2014] NSWSC 116
Mentech Resources Pty Ltd v MCG Resources Pty Ltd (In Liq) & Ors (No. 2) (2012) 33 QLCR 43
Peabody West Burton Pty Ltd & Ors v Mason & Ors (No. 2) [2013] QLC 12
PT Limited and Westfield Limited v Department of Natural Resources and Mines (2007) 28 QLCR 295
Xstrata Coal Queensland Pty Ltd & Ors v Friends of the Earth – Brisbane Co-Op Ltd (No. 2) (2012) 33 QLCR 409

APPEARANCES: Heard on the papers
Written submissions filed by Ms Cassoni and Hancock Coal Pty Ltd

Background

On 8 April 2014 I delivered my decision in the matter of Hancock Coal Pty Ltd v Kelly & Ors and Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (No. 4).[1] That decision dealt with the hearing of an application for a mining lease (MLA) and related environmental authority (EA) by Hancock Coal Pty Ltd (Hancock) and objections thereto by a number of objectors including Fiorella Paola Cassoni (Ms Cassoni).
[1][2014] QLC 12.
In matters such as these, it is the role of the Court to make recommendations to the relevant Minister for the Mineral Resources Act 1989 (MRA) and Environmental Protection Act 1994 (EPA) respectively.
I recommended in the alternative that the MLA be rejected and the EA refused, or that they both be granted with certain conditions, including conditions favourable to Ms Cassoni.
As I was in some doubt as to whether I had power to make recommendations in the alternative, I indicated in my reasons that,…

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 Hancock Coal Pty Ltd v Cassoni (No. 5) 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: [2014] QLC 33
Decision Date: 24 October 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case Hancock Coal Pty Ltd v Cassoni (No. 5) involved a dispute before the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT). Hancock Coal, the applicant, sought to object to Ms Cassoni's objections regarding the granting of a mining lease and associated environmental authority. The dispute centred around whether QCAT should exercise its discretion to order costs under section 34 of the Land Court Act 2000, following the outcome of the objection process. The key issues for the Tribunal to decide were the appropriate factors to consider in exercising its discretion to order costs, the nature of the objections raised by Ms Cassoni, and whether those objections were raised in the public interest.

The Tribunal considered the principles governing the exercise of its discretion in awarding costs under section 34 of the Act. It noted that the statutory language confers an unfettered discretion on the Tribunal. The Tribunal examined the conduct of both parties throughout the objection process, weighing the reasonableness of their actions. The Tribunal found that while Ms Cassoni's objections were genuine, they were not raised in the public interest but rather were driven by her personal opposition to the mining activities. The Tribunal also highlighted the importance of the public interest in the efficient administration of justice, which weighed in favour of awarding costs against Ms Cassoni.

Consequently, the Tribunal determined that it was appropriate to exercise its discretion to order costs against Ms Cassoni. It found that Hancock Coal was entitled to 50% of its costs, with the balance to be borne by Ms Cassoni. The Tribunal emphasised that this order was intended to reflect the reasonableness of Hancock Coal's conduct and the lack of public interest in Ms Cassoni's objections. The final orders mandated that Hancock Coal pay 50% of Ms Cassoni's costs, with the remaining 50% to be paid by Ms Cassoni, subject to any restrictions on her costs that may be applied on assessment.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Hancock Coal Pty Ltd pay 50% of Ms Cassoni’s costs to be agreed, or failing agreement, to be assessed.

2. Subject to any restrictions that may be applied to Ms Cassoni’s costs on assessment, Ms Cassoni be paid 50% of her costs on the standard basis.

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:	Hancock Coal Pty Ltd v Cassoni (No. 5) [2014] QLC 33
PARTIES:	Hancock Coal Pty Ltd (applicant)
v
Fiorella Paola Cassoni (objector)
FILE NOs:	MRA082-13 EPA083-13
DIVISION:	General Division
PROCEEDING:	Application by objector for costs
DELIVERED ON:	24 October 2014
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARD ON:	Heard on the papers Submissions closed 20 May 2014
HEARD AT:	Brisbane
ACTING PRESIDENT:	PA Smith
ORDERS:	1. Hancock Coal Pty Ltd pay 50% of Ms Cassoni’s costs to be agreed, or failing agreement, to be assessed. 2. Subject to any restrictions that may be applied to Ms Cassoni’s costs on assessment, Ms Cassoni be paid 50% of her costs on the standard basis.
CATCHWORDS:	Mineral Resources Act 1989 Environmental Protection Act 1994 Land Court Act 2000 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 COSTS – s 34 Land Court Act 2000 – objections to mining lease application and associated environmental authority – factors governing exercise of discretion – unfettered discretions – reasonableness of parties – whether objection raised in the public interest – application for costs allowed in part Anson Holdings Pty Ltd v Wallace & Anor (No. 2) (2010) 31 QLCR 130 Donovan v Struber & Ors (No. 4) [2013] QLC 14 Dunn v Burtenshaw & Ors (2011) 32 QLCR 270 Gregcarbil Pty Ltd v Backus & Ors (No. 2) (2013) 34 QLCR 253 Hancock Coal Pty Ltd v Kelly & Ors and Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (No. 4) [2014] QLC 12 Mayton v Kennett [2014] NSWSC 116 Mentech Resources Pty Ltd v MCG Resources Pty Ltd (In Liq) & Ors (No. 2) (2012) 33 QLCR 43 Peabody West Burton Pty Ltd & Ors v Mason & Ors (No. 2) [2013] QLC 12 PT Limited and Westfield Limited v Department of Natural Resources and Mines (2007) 28 QLCR 295 Xstrata Coal Queensland Pty Ltd & Ors v Friends of the Earth – Brisbane Co-Op Ltd (No. 2) (2012) 33 QLCR 409
APPEARANCES:	Heard on the papers Written submissions filed by Ms Cassoni and Hancock Coal Pty Ltd