Re Great Mines Pty Ltd & Titley - [2010] QLC 33

LAND COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION: Re Great Mines Pty Ltd & Titley [2010] QLC 0033

PARTIES:In the matter of Mining Lease 10050 – Application by Great Mines Pty Ltd for determination of compensation payable to Anthony L Titley, Arthur R Titley, Benjamin H Titley, Rosemarie C Titley, Teena L Titley
FILE NO:MRA1351-08
(formerly MLC59/08)

PROCEEDING:  Application for determination of compensation
DELIVERED ON:                  4 March 2010
DELIVERED AT:                   Brisbane
MEMBER:Mr BR O’Connor, Judicial Registrar

ORDER/S:The following amounts are payable by the miner:
1.An amount per hectare based on three times the land valuation at the time of disturbance as determined by the Chief Executive, Department of Environment and Resource Management for areas to be disturbed temporarily by mining and access to the mining area or $1,000 per hectare, whichever is the greater.
2.    An amount per hectare based on six times the land valuation at the time of disturbance as determined by the Chief Executive, Department of Environment and Resource Management for areas disturbed permanently by mining and access to the mining area or $1,000 per hectare, whichever is the greater.
3.    The amount is payable prior to the commencement of mining.
4.    Should no mining occur during the term of the lease, the miner shall pay to the landowner the sum of $250 at the end of the lease term.

CATCHWORDS: MINING – MINING LEASE – DETERMINATION OF COMPENSATION
Mineral Resources Act 1989, S.279, 281

S.P White v Warner [2003] QLRT 40

Smith v Cameron [1986– 87] 11 QLCR
Shaw v Heritage Holdings Pty Ltd [1992–93] 14 QLCR

APPEARANCES: Not applicable – Heard on the Papers

Background

The applicant Great Mines Pty Ltd (the miner) seeks the renewal of Mining Lease 10050 in the Charters Towers District. The applicant seeks a term of 10 years. The application was lodged at the office of the Mining Registrar at Charters Towers on 24 October 2007.
The lease is located on Lot 2 on MPH 33483, Parish of Black Jack. Access is through the same property. A grazing operation is conducted on the property. The lease is over a surface area of 1 ha and is sought for the purpose of mining for various minerals and to allow for surface drilling and ventilation for underground mining.

The Act

Section 279 of the Mineral Resources Act 1989 (“the Act”) 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 Registrar, or in the absence of such an agreement, a determination of compensation has been made by the Court. In this instance, no agreement has been lodged with the Registrar and the matter has been referred to the Court for determination.

The matters which must be considered by the Court are set forth in s.281 (3) of the Act. Although s.281 sets out the matters to be considered, it does not define any method of assessment. In Smith v Cameron (1986) 11 QLCR. 64, the Land…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Re Great Mines Pty Ltd & Titley and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2010] QLC 33
Decision Date: 4 March 2010

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Great Mines Pty Ltd applied for the determination of compensation payable to the owners of Mining Lease 10050, Anthony L Titley, Arthur R Titley, Benjamin H Titley, Rosemarie C Titley, and Teena L Titley. The application was pursuant to Section 281 of the Mineral Resources Act 1989. The Court was required to consider the matters set forth in Section 281(3) of the Act, which includes the land valuation at the time of disturbance, the level of usage of the surface by the miner, and the right of the landowner to receive compensation. The Court noted that the method of assessment was not prescribed by the Act and that each case would depend on its own facts and circumstances.

In making its determination, the Court considered that the present use of the land was low intensity grazing but with plans to subdivide the larger lots into smaller rural living areas. The Court also considered that there would be some minor effect from the mining operations which would include the noise of machinery and the movement of people and vehicles on or about the lease area and along the access road. The Court proposed to endorse the terms of settlement offered by the miner with slight adaptation. These were: an amount per hectare based on three times the land valuation at the time of disturbance for areas to be disturbed temporarily by mining and access to the mining area or $1,000 per hectare, whichever is the greater; an amount per hectare based on six times the land valuation at the time of disturbance for areas disturbed permanently by mining and access to the mining area or $1,000 per hectare, whichever is the greater; the amount is payable prior to the commencement of mining; and should no mining occur during the term of the lease, the miner shall pay to the landowner the sum of $250 at the end of the lease term. These determinations include allowance for access and the allowance under Section 281(4)(e) to reflect the compulsory nature of the taking.

The Court ordered that the following amounts are payable by the miner: an amount per hectare based on three times the land valuation at the time of disturbance at the time of disturbance as determined by the Chief Executive, Department of Environment and Resource Management for areas to be disturbed temporarily by mining and access to the mining area or $1,000 per hectare, whichever is the greater; an amount per hectare based on six times the land valuation at the time of disturbance as determined by the Chief Executive, Department of Environment and Resource Management for areas disturbed permanently by mining and access to the mining area or $1,000 per hectare, whichever is the greater; the amount is payable prior to the commencement of mining; and should no mining occur during the term of the lease, the miner shall pay to the landowner the sum of $250 at the end of the lease term.

Orders