Pard Holdings Pty Ltd v Goldfan Ltd

Pard Holdings Pty Ltd sought special leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia from a decision of the Full Court. The dispute concerned the proper interpretation of the marking out requirements for a miscellaneous licence under Western Australian mining legislation.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether substantial compliance with the prescribed marking out requirements for a mining tenement was sufficient, or if strict compliance was mandated. This question arose in relation to the documentary aspects of marking out, specifically the affixing of a notice in Form 20 and a map to a datum post.

The applicant argued that the Full Court had erred by finding that "near enough is good enough" in relation to the paperwork, contrasting this with the High Court's previous decision in *Hunter Resources v Melville*, which had established that strict compliance, not substantial compliance, was required for the physical marking out of a tenement. The applicant contended that the marking out process, as defined by the *Mining Act 1978* (WA) and its Regulations, involved three distinct steps: physical marking with posts, the preparation of a map, and the affixing of a notice in Form 20 to a datum post. The applicant submitted that all three elements were mandatory and required strict adherence to the regulations to ensure clarity for other prospectors.