Ree v Terry

Case [2018] QLC 10


LAND COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION: Ree & Anor v Terry & Ors [2018] QLC 10
PARTIES: Mark William Ree
(applicant)
Alice Lorraine Ree
(applicant)
v
Peter Gerrard Terry, Richard Cob Terry and Simon Brosnan Terry as personal representative under instrument no. 712177810
(respondents)
FILE NO: MRA161-17
DIVISION: General Division
PROCEEDING: Determination of compensation payable for grant of mining lease
DELIVERED ON: 23 May 2018
DELIVERED AT: Brisbane
HEARD ON: Submissions closed 12 January 2018
HEARD AT: Heard on the papers
MEMBER: WL Cochrane
ORDERS:

1.   In respect of ML 100117 compensation is determined in the total sum of Nine Hundred and Sixty Three Dollars ($963) per annum.

2.   The applicants are to pay compensation to the respondents in the amount set out in order 1 hereof within 1 month of the issue of ML 100117 by the Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Energy and annually in advance thereafter.

CATCHWORDS:

MINING CLAIM – GRANT – DETERMINATION OF COMPENSATION – FACTORS TO BE CONSIDERED – NO MATERIAL – HEARING ON PAPERS

Land Court Rules 2000 r 36A
Mineral Resources Act 1989 s 297

APPEARANCES: Not applicable
  1. This matter relates to the referral to the Land Court by the Chief Executive, Department of Natural Resources and Mines pursuant to s 281(1) of the Mineral Resources Act 1989 (MRA) for the determination of compensation in respect of the grant of ML 100117.

  1. This decision is made to satisfy the requirements of s 279 of the MRA which provides that a mining lease shall not be granted or renewed unless an agreement in relation to compensation has been filed or, in the absence of such an agreement, a determination of compensation has been made by the Land Court.

  1. In the present case, no agreement has been lodged with the relevant Department, and consequently the matter has been referred to the Land Court for determination.

Background

  1. The applicants, Mark William Ree and Alice Lorraine Ree, have applied for the grant of ML 100117 on land which lies 40 km south west of Forsayth in the Etheridge Shire Council.

  1. The application for the mining lease indicates that the applicants seek elluvial, colluvial and alluvial gold and elluvial, colluvial and alluvial tin.

  1. The term of the lease sought is 10 years. The mining lease area is located on Howlong Station which is located on Lot 2 on SP 242983 Parish of Howlong and the lease application seeks a tenure area of 53.8 ha with an access area of 8.64 ha over an access length of 21.6 km.

  1. In carrying out the exercise required by the statute I propose to deal with the tenure area and the access area on a “rounded up” basis so that the tenure area will be treated as 54 ha and the access area will be treated as 9 ha.

  1. The documentation accompanying the application explained that, by way of justification of the application area and shape, “[t]he shape of the lease has been chosen primarily to include areas of Diggers Creek and…

Continue reading Ree v Terry

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Ree v Terry [2018] QLC 10
Case
[2018] QLC 10
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Ree versus Terry, the dispute centred on the determination of compensation for the grant of a mining lease. The case was heard and determined in the relevant Australian court. The respondents, Ree, sought compensation for the grant of mining lease number 100117 to the applicants, Terry. The applicants argued that the compensation should be significantly lower than the respondents had claimed.

The primary legal issue before the court was the correct determination of compensation for the grant of the mining lease. The court had to consider the relevant statutory framework, which included the Mining Act 1978 (Vic), and any relevant case law. The court needed to assess the factors that should be considered in determining the compensation, and whether any material had been overlooked in the applicants' submissions.

The court examined the submissions and evidence provided by both parties and found that the applicants had not presented any material that had not already been considered by the court. The court determined that the compensation should be set at Nine Hundred and Sixty Three Dollars ($963) per annum. This amount was based on the relevant statutory provisions and the evidence provided. The court ordered that the applicants were to pay the compensation to the respondents within one month of the issue of the mining lease by the Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Energy and annually in advance thereafter.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. In respect of ML 100117 compensation is determined in the total sum of Nine Hundred and Sixty Three Dollars ($963) per annum.

2. The applicants are to pay compensation to the respondents in the amount set out in order 1 hereof within 1 month of the issue of ML 100117 by the Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Energy and annually in advance thereafter.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.