Re Hava

Gottfried Hava applied for a mining lease under section 245 of the Mineral Resources Act 1989 over land in the Yowah opal field to mine for opal and stockpile ore. The application was made without objection, and Hava requested that the matter be heard on the papers. The court was required to consider whether the application met the criteria set out in section 269(4) of the Act. The court had to determine whether the provisions of the Act were complied with, whether the land was mineralised or appropriate for the purposes sought, whether there would be an acceptable level of development and utilisation of the mineral resources, whether the size and shape of the land was appropriate, whether the term sought was appropriate, whether Hava had the necessary financial and technical capabilities, whether Hava's past performance was satisfactory, whether there would be any disadvantage to holders of existing exploration permits or mineral development licences or applicants for such permits or licences, whether the operations would conform to sound land use management, whether there would be any adverse environmental impacts, whether the public right and interest would be prejudiced, whether any good reason had been shown for a refusal to grant the mining lease, and whether the proposed mining operation was an appropriate land use.

The court found that the application met all the criteria set out in section 269(4) of the Act. The court was satisfied that the provisions of the Act had been complied with, that the land was mineralised or appropriate for the purposes sought, that there would be an acceptable level of development and utilisation of the mineral resources, that the size and shape of the land was appropriate, that the term sought was appropriate, that Hava had the necessary financial and technical capabilities, that Hava's past performance was satisfactory, that there would be no disadvantage to holders of existing exploration permits or mineral development licences or applicants for such permits or licences, that the operations would conform to sound land use management, that there would be no adverse environmental impacts, that the public right and interest would not be prejudiced, that there was no good reason to refuse the mining lease, and that the proposed mining operation was an appropriate land use. The court recommended to the Minister for Mines and Energy that the Mining Lease be granted over the whole of the application area for the purpose and term sought by Hava.

The court granted a mining lease over the whole of the application area for a term of 10 years. The court dispensed with a hearing and heard the matter on the papers. The court relied on the Additional Information and Statutory Declaration sworn by Hava, the Mining Registrar’s Report, and other material lodged by Hava and the Mining Registrar. The court took into account all the evidence before it and recommended to the Minister for Mines and Energy that the Mining Lease be granted over the whole of the application area for the purpose and term sought by Hava.