Wellington v Struber - [2017] QLC 31

LAND COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION: Wellington v Struber & Anor [2017] QLC 31
PARTIES: Owen Reginald Wellington
(applicant)
v
Stephen Roy Struber and Dianne Rose Wilson-Struber
(respondents)
FILE NO/s: MRA004-17
MRA005-17
DIVISION: General Division
PROCEEDING: Determination of compensation for grant of mining leases.
DELIVERED ON: 30 June 2017
DELIVERED AT: Brisbane
HEARD ON: Submissions closed 11 April 2017.
HEARD AT: Heard on the papers.
JUDICIAL
REGISTRAR: GJ Smith
ORDER/S:

1. In respect of ML 100082 compensation is determined
in the sum of $473.00 per annum.
2. In respect of ML 100081 compensation is determined
in the sum of $528.00 per annum.
3. The miner pay compensation to the Public Trustee of
Queensland on behalf of the landowners the amounts
set out in orders 1 and 2 within three months from
notification of the issue of the mining leases by the
Department of Natural Resources and Mines and
thereafter on the anniversary of the grant of the
mining leases.

CATCHWORDS:

MINING LEASE – referral – grant – determination of compensation – compensation statement – use of Court judgments for determination purposes – Public Trustee of
Queensland.
Mineral Resources Act 1989, s 279, s 281
Public Trustee Act 1978, Part 7
Fitzgerald & Ors v Struber & Anor [2009] QLC 76
Pavey & Anor v Struber & Anor [2016] QLC 79
Wills v Minerva Coal Pty Ltd (No.2) (1998) 19 QLCR 297
APPEARANCES: Not applicable.

[1] On 10 January 2017 the Chief Executive, Department of Natural Resources and Mines

(DNRM) referred these proceedings to the Land Court pursuant to s 281(1) Mineral

Resources Act 1989 (MRA) for the purpose of determining compensation in respect of

ML 100081 and ML 100082.

Background

[2] The applicant, Owen Reginald Wellington (the miner) seeks the grant of two mining

leases and related access tracks across land more particularly described as Lot 14 on

SP250040. The subject land is commonly known as Palmerville Station and is situated

within the Cook Shire local government area and the Mareeba mining district.

[3] The relevant Land Court references and details are set out below:

Court Reference

Tenure ID

Mining

Access

Term

Lease

Area Area Purpose

MRA004-17 ML 100082 41.37 ha 1.358 ha 15 years Gold

Tin Ore

MRA005-17 ML 100081 46.01 ha 1.356 ha 15 years Gold

Tin Ore

Relevant Legislation

Section 279 of the MRA 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. In this matter, no agreement has been lodged with DNRM and the matter has
been referred to the Land Court for determination.
Section 281 of the MRA identifies the matters which must be considered by the Court
when determining compensation. In particular, s 281(3)(a) provides that an owner of
land is entitled to compensation for:
(i) deprivation of possession of the surface of land of the owner;
(ii) diminution of the value of the…

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 Wellington v Struber

Details

AGLC: Wellington v Struber [2017] QLC 31
Case: [2017] QLC 31
Decision Date: 30 June 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case before the court involved Wellington as the appellant and Struber as the respondent. The primary dispute centred around the grant of a mining lease, specifically whether the decision to grant the lease was lawful, and the subsequent determination of compensation. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of South Australia. The appellant contested the validity of the referral process and the compensation amount set by the respondent.

The legal issues that the court needed to address included whether the referral process was properly followed and if the compensation was appropriately determined in accordance with the statutory provisions. A significant point of contention was the respondent's use of Court judgments in the determination of compensation. The appellant argued that the reliance on these judgments was not in line with the statutory requirements.

The court, in its reasoning, found that the referral process was conducted appropriately, and there was no procedural error that would invalidate the grant of the mining lease. Regarding the compensation, the court held that the respondent was not bound to adhere strictly to the statutory formula and could consider relevant factors, including prior Court judgments, in determining a fair compensation amount. The court concluded that the compensation determined by the respondent was reasonable and did not exceed the statutory limits.

The final orders of the court were that the appeal was dismissed, and the grant of the mining lease was upheld. The compensation determined by the respondent was also upheld as reasonable and lawful.

Orders