Hoolihan v Prichard

[2009] QLC 172

LAND COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:  Hoolihan v Prichard [2009] QLC 0172

PARTIES:In the matter of Mining Lease No 3434 – Determination of compensation payable by Edward John Hoolihan to Wayne Francis Prichard

FILE NO:MRA320-09

PROCEEDING:  Application for determination of compensation

DELIVERED ON:                  20 November 2009

DELIVERED AT:                   Brisbane

MEMBER:Mr BR O’Connor, Judicial Registrar

ORDER/S:1.      Compensation determined at $350.

2.    The miner pay the total compensation of $350 to the landholders within two months from notification of the renewal of the mining lease by the Mining Registrar.

CATCHWORDS:                  MINING LEASE – DETERMINATION OF COMPENSATION

Mineral Resources Act 1989 s.281

APPEARANCES:                  Not applicable – Heard on the Papers

Background

1. Edward John Hoolihan (the miner) currently holds Mining Lease 3434. The mining lease was originally granted on 12 November 1985 for a period of 21 years. On 16 April 2009 the miner lodged an application for a renewal of the mining lease for a term of 7 years with the Mining Registrar, Georgetown District.

1. This determination of compensation relates to access to the mining lease and to part of the mining lease itself (8 ha) located on a property owned by Wayne Francis Prichard (the landholder).

Court Practice Direction

1. On 5 August 2009 the Court sent letters to the miner and the landholder bringing the referral of this matter to the Court by the Mining Registrar to their attention and advising them of their obligations under Court Practice Direction. Timeframes for the submissions of relevant material were provided to each party. Both the landholder and the miner have made submissions to the Court.

1. It is not an uncommon occurrence for either or both parties in a compensation matter before the Court to fail to make detailed relevant submissions to the Court. The absence of detailed, or any, compensation evidence clearly makes the task of the Court in determining compensation very difficult. In the circumstances, I adopt the analysis of the legislative provisions, compensation principles and methodology applied by Mining Referree Windridge in Re Wallace & Ors & Evans.[1]

Determination

[1]     [2006] QLRT 93.

1. Taking into account all heads of compensation in s.281(3) of the Mineral Resources Act 1989 (the Act) and absent any details of the area of land required for access and taking into account both parties’ submissions, I assess compensation for the lease area in the sum of $5 per hectare per annum for the term of the lease (7 years), which equates to $280. I also award $40 for access. Pursuant to s.281(4)(e) of the Act, I award the additional sum of $30.

1. Taking all relevant factors into account, I order that the miner pay the total compensation of $350 to the landholders within two months from notification of the renewal of the mining lease by the Mining Registrar.

1. I note that the landowner’s submissions on breach of lease conditions by the miner are not relevant to the Court’s determination on compensation. This is a matter to be taken up with the Mining Registrar.

BR O’CONNOR

JUDICIAL REGISTRAR