Malaco Leichhardt Pty Ltd v Campbell

[2014] QLC 48

LAND COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Malaco Leichhardt Pty Ltd v Campbell [2014] QLC 48

PARTIES:

Malaco Leichhardt Pty Ltd
(applicant)

v

Ian Charles Campbell
(respondent)

FILE NOS

MRA887-11

DIVISION:

General Division

PROCEEDING:

Determination of compensation payable for renewal of mining lease

DELIVERED ON:

9 December 2014

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARD ON:

Submissions closed on 23 October 2014

HEARD AT:

Heard on the Papers

MEMBER:

WA Isdale

ORDERS:

1. Compensation for ML 2773 is determined in the sum of Two Hundred Dollars ($200) per annum.

2. The compensation is payable by the applicant to the respondent within 30 days of the grant of renewal of ML 2773 and in each subsequent year of the term of ML 2773 is payable on the anniversary of the date of grant of the renewal.

CATCHWORDS:

MINING LEASE – determination of compensation – factors to be considered – lack of material from parties

Land Court Rules 2000, Rule 36A
Mineral Resources Act 1989, ss 279, 281

Horn v Sunderland Corporation [1941] 2 KB 26
Mitchell v Oakhill and Mitchell (10 March 1998) unreported
Richardson v Barrett [2001] QLRT 89
Shaw v Heritage Holdings Pty Ltd (1992-93) 14 QLCR 139
Smith v Cameron (1986-87) 11 QLCR 64

APPEARANCES:

Not applicable

Background

1. The applicant miner is seeking the renewal, for a term of 21 years, of Mining Lease (ML) 2773 which is for copper ore and has an area of 3.92 ha. It is in the Cloncurry area. As the applicant and the respondent landowner have not lodged a compensation agreement with the Mining Registrar that official has referred the matter of compensation to the Court to determine. The Court has the benefit of the material provided by the Mining Registrar.

2. On 25 November 2011 the Court set a timetable for it to be provided with evidence and submissions relevant to compensation. The timetable ended on 27 January 2012. Despite adjournments being granted, the matter has not been resolved nor has the material required by the Court been provided. On 2 October 2014 the Court wrote to the parties advising that under Rule 36A of the Land Court Rules 2000 the Court would proceed to determine the matter without an oral hearing unless there was an objection, with reasons, received by 4.00pm on 23 October 2014. Additionally the parties were advised that supporting material or submissions in regard to compensation was to be forwarded to the Court by 4.00pm on 23 October 2014. There was no response from the parties.

The applicable law

1. Section 279 of the Mineral Resources Act 1989 (MRA) provides that a mining lease shall not be granted or renewed unless an agreement in relation to compensation has been filed at the office of the Mining Registrar, or in the absence of such an agreement, a determination of compensation has been made by the Court. In this matter, no agreement in registrable form has been lodged with the Mining Registrar and the matter has been referred to the Court for determination.

2. The issues which must be considered by the Court are set forth in s 281(3) and (4) of the MRA.

3. Although s 281 sets out the matters to be considered, it does not define any method of assessment. In Smith v Cameron,[1] the Land Court held:

   “The section in my opinion merely identifies matters which shall be taken into consideration in making the assessment. It does not prescribe a method of valuation. No doubt each case will depend on its own facts and circumstances but it seems to me that either method is open to the valuer.”

[1](1986-87) 11 QLCR 64, 74 – 75.

1. In Shaw v Heritage Holdings Pty Ltd,[2] the Land Court said:

   “The method of assessment remains a matter which will be governed by the facts and circumstances of each case in which event emphasis may shift from one method to another.”

   [2](1992-93) 14 QLCR 139 at p 146.

2. In Mitchell v Oakhill and Mitchell,[3] the then President of the Land Court, referring to s 281(3) of the MRA, found:

   “the latter section does not prescribe a method of assessment. In my view, as long as the amount of compensation finally determined sufficiently accounts for each of the matters referred to in the sub-section, it is not necessary to quantify an amount in respect of each of the matters referred to.”

   [3](10 March 1998) unreported.

3. In determining compensation under s 281 of the MRA, the Court has adopted the same approach that Deputy President Smith (as he then was) took in Richardson v Barrett.[4] The matters set out in the section are matters to be taken into account in determining compensation, rather than being separate heads of compensation requiring separate treatment to arrive at an accumulated figure.

   [4][2001] QLRT 89 at paragraphs 9, 10 and 14.

4. The overriding principle is of equivalence, ensuring that, so far as monetary compensation can do it, the landholders are placed in the same position as if the mining leases were not granted.[5] Care must also be taken to ensure that there is no “doubling up” of compensation. This Court is a specialised Court and will apply its own expertise in order to assist it to perform its function.

   [5]Horn v Sunderland Corporation [1941] 2 KB 26 at 43 per Jacobs J.

5. Section 281(3) of the MRA sates that the Land Court “shall settle the amount of compensation” that the landowner is entitled to. It must set a monetary figure which is certain.

Determination of compensation

1. The land is used for cattle grazing and breeding but no evidence has been provided of the amount of lost income due to the mining lease. In view of what is known from the file, which has been set out above, compensation is determined in the sum of $200 per annum for the period of the lease. The compensation is payable within 30 days of the date of grant of the renewal of ML 2773 and in each subsequent year for the term of the lease, on the anniversary of the date of grant of the renewal.

Orders

1.     Compensation for ML 2773 is determined in the sum of Two Hundred Dollars ($200) per annum.

2.     The compensation is payable by the applicant to the respondent within 30 days of the grant of renewal of ML 2773 and in each subsequent year of the term of ML 2773 is payable on the anniversary of the date of grant of the renewal.

WA ISDALE

MEMBER OF THE LAND COURT