Shaw v Idemitsu Australia Resources Pty Ltd

LAND COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Shaw & Ors v Idemitsu Australia Resources Pty Ltd & Ors [2020] QLC 40

PARTIES:

Michael David Shaw, Margaret Eleanor Shaw, Edward Michael Shaw, John David Shaw and Simone Margaret Shaw
(applicants)

v

Idemitsu Australia Resources Pty Ltd
ACN 010 236 272
(respondent)

Bowen Investment (Australia) Pty Ltd
ACN 002 806 831
(respondent)

Bligh Coal Limited
ACN 010 186 393
(respondent)

FILE NO:

MRA730-19

DIVISION:

General Division

PROCEEDING:

Application for further and better particulars

DELIVERED ON:

25 November 2020

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARD ON:

20 November 2020

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

MEMBER:

PG Stilgoe OAM

ORDERS:

1.    The respondents must provide further and better particulars of the mine site safety requirements and safety laws referred to in paragraphs 11, 12 and 16 of the applicants’ request for further and better particulars.

2.    The application is otherwise dismissed.

3.    I will hear the parties as to further orders.

CATCHWORDS:

PROCEDURE – CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS – PLEADINGS – PARTICULARS – FURTHER AND BETTER – where the applicants requested further and better particulars of a response filed by the respondents in proceedings commenced by the applicants to review a compensation agreement between them and the respondent mining companies – where the respondents declined to give any further and better particulars – whether the respondents were required to provide the further and better particulars sought by the applicants

Land Court Act 2000 s 7
Land Court Rules 2000 r 4
Mineral Resources Act 1989 s 283B, s 363
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 r 149, r 157

Barclay Mowlem Construction Ltd v Dampier Port Authority [2006] WASC 281, cited
Cross v Queensland Rugby Football Union Ltd [2001] QSC 173, cited
ERO Georgetown Gold Operations Pty Ltd v Henry (2015) 212 LGERA 342, cited
Macarthur Central Shopping Centre Pty Ltd as TTE v Valuer-General [2016] QLC 10, cited
Nothdurft & Anor v QGC Pty Limited & Ors [2017] QLC 41, cited
Van der Est & Anor v Queensland Rail Limited (No 2) [2018] QLC 4, cited

APPEARANCES:

K McAuliffe-Lake (instructed by Marland Law) for the applicants
J Briggs (solicitor), Ashurst, for the respondents

Introduction

1. I am tasked with deciding whether Michael David Shaw, Margaret Eleanor Shaw, Edward Michael Shaw, John David Shaw and Simone Margaret Shaw (the applicants) are entitled to further and better particulars of a response filed on behalf of Idemitsu Australia Resources Pty Ltd, Bowen Investment (Australia) Pty Ltd and Bligh Coal Limited (the miners).

1. On the face of it, this case is a simple one. The miners were granted a mining lease (ML) over Yongala in 1993. The miners operate a coal mine on the ML through Ensham Resources Pty Ltd.

1. The miners signed a compensation agreement with the then owner, Valdemar John Walsh. The applicants bought Yongala in 2005 and the compensation agreement was assigned to them.

1. Yongala is accessible from Wyuna Road. There is an access track from Wyuna Road (Yongala Access Road) and a haul…