Hewitt v Tully

LAND COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Hewitt & Ors v Tully [2016] QLC 71

PARTIES:

Darcy John Hewitt, Christopher Lloyd Hewitt and Helen Hewitt
(applicants)
v
Mark Durack Tully
(respondent)

FILE NO:

MRA230-16

DIVISION:

General Division

PROCEEDING:

Determination of compensation for renewal of mining lease.

DELIVERED ON:

11 November 2016

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARD ON:

Submissions closed 29 August 2016

HEARD AT:

On the papers

JUDICIAL REGISTRAR:

GJ Smith

ORDERS:

1.     In respect of ML 60379 compensation is determined in the total sum of $300.00.

2.     The applicants pay compensation to the respondent the amount set out in order 1 within two months from notification of the renewal of the mining lease by the Department of Natural Resources and Mines.

CATCHWORDS:

MINING LEASE – referral – renewal – access only – determination of compensation – absence of expert or valuation evidence – use of Court judgments for determination purposes.

Mineral Resources Act 1989 s 279A

Keefe v Georgina Pastoral Company [2013] QLC 67

Stoverink  v Higgins [2016] QLC 26

Unimin Australia Limited v Freeman [2007] QLC 76

Wills v Minerva Coal Pty Ltd [No.2] (1998) 19 QLCR 297

APPEARANCES:

Not applicable

1. This matter concerns a referral to the Land Court by the Chief Executive, Department of Natural Resources and Mines (DNRM) pursuant to s 279A of the Mineral Resources Act 1989 (MRA) for the determination of compensation in respect of the renewal of Mining Lease 60379 (ML 60379).

Background

1. The applicants, Darcy John Hewitt, Christopher Lloyd Hewitt and Helen Hewitt (the miners) seek the renewal of a mining lease, a 2.55 ha access track to which passes across grazing land owned by the respondent Mark Durack Tully (the landowner). The land is more particularly described as Lot 2 on Plan BG2 is situated 78 km north-east of the town of Quilpie within Quilpie Shire Local Government area.

Relevant Legislation

1. Section 279 of the MRA provides that a mining lease shall not be granted or renewed unless an agreement in relation to compensation has been filed or, in the absence of such an agreement, a determination of compensation has been made by the Land Court.  In this matter, no agreement has been lodged with DNRM and the matter has been referred to the Land Court for determination.

2. Section 281 of the MRA identifies the matters which must be considered by the Court when determining compensation. In particular, s 281(3)(a) provides that an owner of land is entitled to compensation for:

   “(i) deprivation of possession of the surface of land of the owner;

   (ii) diminution of the value of the land of the owner or any improvements thereon;

   (iii)diminution of the use made or which may be made of the land of the owner or any improvements thereon;

   (iv)severance of any part of the land from other parts thereof or from other land of the owner;

   (v) any surface rights of access;

   (vi)all loss or expense that arises; as a consequence of the grant or renewal of the mining lease.”

3. Section 281(4) enables…