Ulan Coal Mines v Minister for Mineral Resources
Case
•
[2008] NSWCA 174
•8 August 2008
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Ulan Coal Mines v Minister for Mineral Resources [2008] NSWCA 174
[2008] NSWCA 174
8 August 2008
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Ulan Coal Mines Limited (Ulan) appealed to the Court of Appeal of New South Wales against a decision of the primary judge concerning the grant of mining leases. The dispute centred on whether the Minister for Mineral Resources was prohibited from granting mining leases over the surface of land containing improvements, pursuant to section 62 of the *Mining Act 1992* (NSW), and the relationship between this prohibition and the dispute resolution mechanism provided by the Schedule to the Act. A further issue was whether section 75V of the *Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979* (NSW) impliedly repealed section 62 of the *Mining Act 1992*.
The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether section 62 of the *Mining Act 1992* imposed a prohibition on the grant of mining leases over land containing improvements, and if so, how this prohibition interacted with the dispute resolution provisions. Additionally, the Court had to consider whether the later-enacted section 75V of the *Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979* operated to impliedly repeal section 62 of the *Mining Act 1992*.
The Court found that section 62 of the *Mining Act 1992* did indeed prohibit the grant of mining leases over the surface of land on which there were improvements, and that this prohibition was not displaced by the dispute resolution mechanism in the Schedule. Furthermore, the Court held that section 75V of the *Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979* did not impliedly repeal section 62 of the *Mining Act 1992*.
The appeal was allowed. However, formal orders were to be made after the parties had an opportunity to address the form of the declaration and any consequential orders, including whether the proceedings should be remitted to the primary judge for further submissions on specific findings, and the order for costs. Written submissions on these matters were to be filed within 21 days.
The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether section 62 of the *Mining Act 1992* imposed a prohibition on the grant of mining leases over land containing improvements, and if so, how this prohibition interacted with the dispute resolution provisions. Additionally, the Court had to consider whether the later-enacted section 75V of the *Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979* operated to impliedly repeal section 62 of the *Mining Act 1992*.
The Court found that section 62 of the *Mining Act 1992* did indeed prohibit the grant of mining leases over the surface of land on which there were improvements, and that this prohibition was not displaced by the dispute resolution mechanism in the Schedule. Furthermore, the Court held that section 75V of the *Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979* did not impliedly repeal section 62 of the *Mining Act 1992*.
The appeal was allowed. However, formal orders were to be made after the parties had an opportunity to address the form of the declaration and any consequential orders, including whether the proceedings should be remitted to the primary judge for further submissions on specific findings, and the order for costs. Written submissions on these matters were to be filed within 21 days.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Administrative Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Appeal
-
Judicial Review
-
Statutory Construction
-
Jurisdiction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Hunter Environment Lobby Inc v Minister for Planning and Infrastructure (No 4) [2014] NSWLEC 200
Cases Citing This Decision
6
Valuer-General v Perilya Broken Hill Ltd
[2013] NSWCA 265
Ulan Coal Mines v Minister for Mineral Resources (No. 2)
[2008] NSWCA 251
Cases Cited
18
Statutory Material Cited
11
Ulan Coal Mines Limited v Minister for Mineral Resources
[2007] NSWSC 1299
Kayuga Coal Pty Ltd v Ducey
[2000] NSWCA 54
Project Blue Sky Inc v Australian Broadcasting Authority
[1998] HCA 28