Re Zopponi

[2009] QLC 128

LAND COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:  Re Zopponi & Ors [2009] QLC 0128

PARTIES:In the matter of Mining Lease No 20484 – Determination of compensation payable by Frank Zopponi to S.R. Struber and D.R. Wilson-Struber

FILE NO:MRA118-09

PROCEEDING:  Application for determination of compensation

DELIVERED ON:         1 September 2009

DELIVERED AT:                   Brisbane

MEMBER:Mr BR O’Connor, Judicial Registrar

ORDER/S:1.    Compensation determined at $1,100.

2.The miner pay the total compensation of $1,100 to the landholders; $500 within two months from notification of the grant of the mining lease by the Mining Registrar and $600 on the fifth anniversary of the grant of the lease.

CATCHWORDS:                  MINING LEASE – DETERMINATION OF COMPENSATION

Mineral Resources Act 1989, s. 281

Re Wallace & Ors & Evans [2006] QLRT 93, applied

APPEARANCES:                  Not applicable – Heard on the Papers

Background

1. Frank Zopponi Donovan (the miner) made application for Mining Lease 20484. The mining lease was originally granted on 1 February 1974 for a period of six years. On 1 February 1980 the mining lease was renewed for a further term of six years and on 1 February 1986 the mining lease was again renewed, this time for a term of 21 years. On 14 October 2005 the miner lodged an application for another renewal of the mining lease for a term of 21 years with the Mining Registrar, Mareeba District.

2. This determination of compensation relates to access to the mining lease and the mining lease itself over a property owned by S. Struber and D.R. Wilson-Struber.  The lease area is 46 ha (rounded).

Court Practice Direction

1. On 21 January 2009 the Court sent letters to the miner and the landholders bringing the referral of this matter to the Court by the Mining Registrar to their attention, and advising them of their obligations under Court Practice Direction. Timeframes for the submission of relevant material were provided to each party. Both parties have made brief submissions to the Court. The miner has submitted that there should be no compensation.

2. It is not an uncommon occurrence for either or both parties in a compensation matter before the Court to fail to make detailed submissions. The absence of detailed compensation evidence clearly makes the task of the Court in determining compensation very difficult. In the circumstances, I adopt the analysis of the legislative provisions, compensation principles and methodology applied by Mining Referee Windridge in Re Wallace & Ors & Evans.[1]

   [1]     [2006] QLRT 93.

Determination

1. Taking into account all heads of compensation in subsection 3 of section 281 of the Mineral Resources Act 1989 (the Act), and absent any details of the area of land required for access and taking into account both parties submissions, I assess compensation for access in the minimal sum of $5 per annum for the term of the lease, which equates to $966. Pursuant to s.281(4)(e) of the Act, I award the additional sum of $100. I allow a further $30 for access compensation.

2. Taking all relevant factors into account, I order that the miner pay the total compensation of $1,100 to the landholders within two months from notification of the renewal of the mining lease by the Mining Registrar.

BR O’CONNOR
JUDICIAL REGISTRAR