Woels v Hicks

In the Land Court of Queensland, Woels v Hicks was a proceeding concerning the determination of compensation payable to Cameron Jeffrey Hicks for the renewal of Mining Lease No 2049. The applicant, Maximillian Jason Woels, sought the renewal of the mining lease for a period of five years over a surface area of 14.5427 hectares, which has been rounded off to 15 hectares for the purposes of this application. The lease is located on Lot 19 on CLM694 GHFL3735A, Parish of Keilambete, County of Clermont. The primary legal issue before the Court was to determine the compensation payable to Hicks under Section 281 of the Mineral Resources Act 1989, given that no agreement in relation to compensation had been filed at the office of the Registrar.

The Court considered various factors in making its determination. It noted that Section 281 of the Mineral Resources Act 1989 sets out the matters to be considered in determining compensation, but does not prescribe a method of assessment. The Court referred to previous cases, such as Smith v Cameron and Shaw v Heritage Holdings Pty Ltd, which held that the method of assessment remains a matter governed by the facts and circumstances of each case. The Court also considered the relatively small area involved, the lack of formal valuation evidence, and prior determinations and agreements for leases and claims in the Emerald area. Based on these factors, the Court determined compensation under Part 7 of the Mineral Resources Act 1989, and awarded $20 per annum per hectare for the term of the lease, along with an additional sum of $50 for access, and $155 under s.281(4)(e) to reflect the compulsory nature of the action taken.

The Court further directed that the miner pay the total compensation in the sum of $1,700 (rounded) to the landowner within three months of notification of grant of the mining lease by the Mining Registrar. The Court made no order for costs, as neither party sought an order for costs and it was not deemed appropriate in this matter.