Sawyer v Grabbe & Anor - [2021] QLC 27

LAND COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION: Sawyer v Grabbe & Anor [2021] QLC 27

PARTIES: David Blandford Sawyer
(applicant)

v

Anthony Grabbe
(respondent)

Lynette Grabbe
(respondent)

FILE NOs: MRA496-20

PROCEEDING: Determination of compensation payable for renewal of mining claims

DELIVERED ON: 13 August 2021

DELIVERED AT: Brisbane

HEARD ON: Submissions closed 14 July 2021
Matter allocated on 6 August 2021

HEARD AT: Heard on the papers

MEMBER: JR McNamara

ORDERS:
I determine that David Blandford Sawyer must pay Anthony Grabbe and Lynette Grabbe compensation in respect of MC 60239 as follows:1.

Four hundred and eighty-six dollars and ninety-four cents ($486.94); plus(a)

Five hundred and fifteen dollars and fifty-nine cents ($515.59) per year for the term of the renewal, indexed to CPI.(b)

I determine that must pay Anthony Grabbe and Lynette Grabbe compensation in respect of MC 300330 as follows:David Blandford Sawyer 2.

Nine hundred and fifty-five dollars and ninety cents ($955.90); plus(a)

Five hundred and fifteen dollars and fifty-nine cents ($515.59) per year for the term of the grant, indexed to CPI.(b)

Should either MC 60239 or MC 300330 cease to exist prior to the other, the holder of the live mining claim must provide the combined annual payment identified in orders 1(b) and 2(b).3.

CATCHWORDS:
ENERGY AND RESOURCES – MINERALS – MINING FOR MINERALS – COMPENSATION – where the Land Court recently determined compensation for small mining grants in Australian Asiatic Gems Pty Ltd v Grabbe & Anor [2021] QLC 25 and Land & Anor v Grabbe & Anor [2021] QLC 1 – where the valuation report from the Land matter was ‘recycled’ – where compensation for deprivation of the surface area in respect of the access track should not be reduced or apportioned to the applicant – where there is no other factual basis for the Court to depart from a number of findings in the Australian Asiatic Gems decision and the Land decision

Mineral Resources Act 1989 s 85(5), s 281(3)(a), s 391C

Australian Asiatic Gems Pty Ltd v Grabbe & Anor [2021] QLC 25, applied

Kelly v Chelsea on the Park Pty Ltd[2020] QLC 36, cited

Land & Anor v Grabbe & Anor [2021] QLC 1, applied
Makita (Aust) Pty Ltd v Sprowles (2001) 52 NSWLR 705; (2001) 25 NSWCCR 218, cited

APPEARANCES: Not applicable

Introduction

This matter concerns compensation for two mining claims, one a renewal (MC 60239), the other a fresh grant (MC 300330), over land owned by Anthony and Lynette Grabbe (respondents). This decision is the third recent Land Court decision concerning small mining activity on the Grabbe’s property “Nooralaba”[1] near Cunnamulla.[2] Like the applicants in those recent decisions, Mr Sawyer is an opal miner.
[1]Land & Anor v Grabbe & Anor [2021] QLC 1 (the Land decision); Australian Asiatic Gems Pty Ltd v Grabbe & Anor [2021] QLC 25 (the Australian Asiatic Gems decision).
[2]85 km NW of Cunnamulla.

The tenures applied for are mining claims. The Small Scale Miners…

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.

Continue reading Sawyer v Grabbe & Anor

Details

AGLC: Sawyer v Grabbe [2021] QLC 27
Case: [2021] QLC 27
Decision Date: 13 August 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Sawyer v Grabbe & Anor, the Land Court addressed compensation issues arising from mining grants. The dispute involved David Blandford Sawyer and Anthony and Lynette Grabbe. The court had to determine the compensation due for two mining grants, MC 60239 and MC 300330, after considering the valuation report from the previous cases Australian Asiatic Gems Pty Ltd v Grabbe & Anor and Land & Anor v Grabbe & Anor. The court was required to decide whether the compensation for the surface area in respect of the access track should be reduced, apportioned, or left unchanged.

The legal issues involved the proper application of the previous court’s findings and the valuation report. The court noted that the previous valuation report had been reused and that the Grabbes argued that the compensation for the surface area should not be reduced or apportioned. The court found that there was no factual basis to depart from the findings in the earlier cases, particularly concerning the compensation for the surface area. The court further ruled that the compensation for the surface area should not be reduced or apportioned, aligning with the previous decisions.

The court concluded that David Blandford Sawyer must pay Anthony and Lynette Grabbe compensation for the mining grants. The compensation for MC 60239 was set at $486.94, plus an annual payment of $515.59 per year, indexed to the Consumer Price Index, for the term of the renewal. For MC 300330, the compensation was set at $955.90, plus the same annual payment. If either grant ceased to exist before the other, the holder of the remaining grant must provide the combined annual payment. This ruling adhered to the findings in the earlier cases and ensured that the compensation was fairly applied.

Orders

Orders of the court

I determine that David Blandford Sawyer must pay Anthony Grabbe and Lynette Grabbe compensation in respect of MC 60239 as follows:1.

Four hundred and eighty-six dollars and ninety-four cents ($486.94); plus(a)

Five hundred and fifteen dollars and fifty-nine cents ($515.59) per year for the term of the renewal, indexed to CPI.(b)

I determine that must pay Anthony Grabbe and Lynette Grabbe compensation in respect of MC 300330 as follows:David Blandford Sawyer 2.

Nine hundred and fifty-five dollars and ninety cents ($955.90); plus(a)

Five hundred and fifteen dollars and fifty-nine cents ($515.59) per year for the term of the grant, indexed to CPI.(b)

Should either MC 60239 or MC 300330 cease to exist prior to the other, the holder of the live mining claim must provide the combined annual payment identified in orders 1(b) and 2(b).3.

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.

CITATION:	Sawyer v Grabbe & Anor [2021] QLC 27
PARTIES:	David Blandford Sawyer (applicant)
v
Anthony Grabbe (respondent) Lynette Grabbe (respondent)
FILE NOs:	MRA496-20
PROCEEDING:	Determination of compensation payable for renewal of mining claims
DELIVERED ON:	13 August 2021
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARD ON:	Submissions closed 14 July 2021 Matter allocated on 6 August 2021
HEARD AT:	Heard on the papers
MEMBER:	JR McNamara
ORDERS:	I determine that David Blandford Sawyer must pay Anthony Grabbe and Lynette Grabbe compensation in respect of MC 60239 as follows:1. Four hundred and eighty-six dollars and ninety-four cents ($486.94); plus(a) Five hundred and fifteen dollars and fifty-nine cents ($515.59) per year for the term of the renewal, indexed to CPI.(b) I determine that must pay Anthony Grabbe and Lynette Grabbe compensation in respect of MC 300330 as follows:David Blandford Sawyer 2. Nine hundred and fifty-five dollars and ninety cents ($955.90); plus(a) Five hundred and fifteen dollars and fifty-nine cents ($515.59) per year for the term of the grant, indexed to CPI.(b) Should either MC 60239 or MC 300330 cease to exist prior to the other, the holder of the live mining claim must provide the combined annual payment identified in orders 1(b) and 2(b).3.
CATCHWORDS:	ENERGY AND RESOURCES – MINERALS – MINING FOR MINERALS – COMPENSATION – where the Land Court recently determined compensation for small mining grants in Australian Asiatic Gems Pty Ltd v Grabbe & Anor [2021] QLC 25 and Land & Anor v Grabbe & Anor [2021] QLC 1 – where the valuation report from the Land matter was ‘recycled’ – where compensation for deprivation of the surface area in respect of the access track should not be reduced or apportioned to the applicant – where there is no other factual basis for the Court to depart from a number of findings in the Australian Asiatic Gems decision and the Land decision Mineral Resources Act 1989 s 85(5), s 281(3)(a), s 391C Australian Asiatic Gems Pty Ltd v Grabbe & Anor [2021] QLC 25, applied Kelly v Chelsea on the Park Pty Ltd[2020] QLC 36, cited Land & Anor v Grabbe & Anor [2021] QLC 1, applied Makita (Aust) Pty Ltd v Sprowles (2001) 52 NSWLR 705; (2001) 25 NSWCCR 218, cited
APPEARANCES:	Not applicable