Panich v Minister for Natural Resources

[1999] QLC 60

[1999] QLC 60

 

 

LAND COURT

BRISBANE

3 JUNE 1999

Re:     Applications for Forfeiture –

Section 238(1) Land Act 1994 –
  Special Leases:         15/52809 and 15/52810
  Lessee:  D Panich

(Hearing at Cunnamulla)

D E C I S I O N

Pursuant to s.238(1) of the Land Act 1994 (the Act), the Minister, on 30 December 1998, referred to the Court the matter of deciding whether Special Leases 15/52809 and 15/52810 may be forfeited.
           At the time of the references, the Court was provided with copies of notices dated 2 December 1998, addressed to the lessee, advising him of the Minister's intention to refer the matters and the grounds on which the Minister considered the leases may be forfeited.  There has been therefore compliance with the requirements of sub-ss.(2), (3) and (4) of s.238 of the Act. 
           The leases are for terms of 20 years which commenced on 1 September 1993, over land described as follows:

Special Lease 15/52809 – Lot 4 CP 841119, Parish of Yowah, County of Wellington, containing 1,777 m².

Special Lease 15/52810 – Lot 9 CP 841119, Parish of Yowah, County of Wellington, containing 1,380 m².

Lot 4 is situated in Boobialla Street and Lot 9 adjoining in Matrix Drive in the Town of Yowah.

The notices of the cases being brought before the Court were returned unclaimed after having been posted to the last-known address of the lessee.  In accordance with the Rules of the Court, public notices advising the venue, date and time of the hearing were advertised in both a local and national newspaper.  There was no appearance at the hearing on 19 May 1999, by the lessee.
           Mr M McManus appeared on behalf of the Minister and called Mr MP McCosker, registered valuer employed by the Department of Natural Resources.  A report dealing with the considered non-compliance with a lease condition was tendered in each matter.  After an inspection of the leases in June 1997 the lessee had been notified by letter dated 27 June 1997 of non-compliance with the Development Condition in the leases.  Following a response and explanation by the lessee a 12-month extension of the Development Condition was given until 1 August 1998.  Subsequent inspections by various officers including the latest by Mr McCosker on the day before the hearing had confirmed that the only improvements on the land comprised fencing to the value of $500 on Lot 4 and $250 on Lot 9. 
           The relevant Development Condition within each of the leases, is as follows:

"M76The lessee shall within two (2) years from the commencement of the term of the lease and to the satisfaction of the Minister administering the Land Act 1962 effect structural improvements on the leased land in accordance with plans and specifications approved by the Paroo Shire Council of a value of not less than $15,000; construction of such improvements shall be commenced within one (1) year from the commencement of the term of the lease and shall thereafter proceed at a rate of progress satisfactory to the Minister administering the Land Act 1962."

Clearly, despite one extension, the Development Condition in each of the leases has not been met.  The Court was also informed that annual rent for each lease was overdue and rates payable to the Paroo Shire Council were in arrears for each lease.
           The decision of this Court is that each of the leases may be forfeited on the grounds of non-compliance with the Development Condition M76.

RE WENCK
MEMBER OF THE LAND COURT