Brady & Ors, Re [2006] QLRT 157
LAND AND RESOURCES TRIBUNAL
QUEENSLAND
CITATION: Re Brady & Ors [2006] QLRT 157
PARTIES: In the matter of Application for Mining Lease
No 60417 by Michael James Brady, Kerry Frances
Brady, Earl Raymond Sweedman and Colleen
Barbara Sweedman.
FILE NO: AML209/06
PROCEEDING: Application for mining lease
DELIVERED ON: 7 December 2006
DELIVERED AT: Brisbane
HEARING DATE: Heard on the Papers
MEMBER/S: Smith DP
ORDER/S: 1. Hearing dispensed with (at [2])
2. Recommendation made that, subject to the
Applicants completing the necessary Deed
pursuant to the I.L.U.A., the Mining Lease be
granted. (at [17])
CATCHWORDS: MINING – MINING LEASE – RECOMMENDATION
Mineral Resources Act 1989, ss. 245, 252, 269, 270
COUNSEL: N/A
SOLICITOR/S: N/A
[1] SMITH DP: On 21 April 2006 Michael James Brady, Kerry Frances Brady, Earl
Raymond Sweedman and Colleen Barbara Sweedman (hereafter referred to as
“the Applicants”) lodged Mining Lease Application No 60417 with the Mining
Registrar, Quilpie District. The Application was lodged pursuant to s. 245 of the
Mineral Resources Act 1989 (“the Act”) for the purpose of mining for opal. No
objections were duly lodged to the Mining Lease Application.
Request to dispense with a hearing – Section 270
[2] The Applicants have requested that the Application be dealt with without an oral
hearing. Taking in to account s. 270 of the Act, I am satisfied that there is
sufficient information before me. Accordingly, I order that a hearing of this
Application be dispensed with.
-- 1 of 4 --
Section 269(4) criteria
[3] In taking account of and considering the criteria specified in s. 269(4) of the Act, I
have relied on the Additional Information and Statutory Declaration of Michael
James Brady dated 9 November 2006. I have also relied upon the other material
lodged by the Applicants with the Mining Registrar and the Mining Registrar’s
Report in relation to this Application. These reasons refer to the salient points,
but not all the relevant evidence, that I have taken into account.
Section 269(4)(a) – Have the provisions of the Act been complied with?
[4] On 7 September 2006, the Mining Registrar issued a Certificate of Application.
The Mining Registrar can only issue the Certificate if satisfied that the Applicants
are eligible to apply for the mining lease and have complied with the requirements
of the Act with respect to the Application.1 I note that the Application is over a
non-exclusive tenure. I also note that this application is subject to a native title
I.L.U.A. It is the Applicants responsibility to comply with all requirements under
the I.L.U.A. To date, the Applicants have not completed the required Deed
pursuant to the I.L.U.A. In my opinion, subject to completion of the Deed, there
is sufficient evidence of compliance with the provisions of the Act in respect to
this Application.
Section 269(4)(b) – Is the land applied for mineralised or are the other purposes for which
the lease is sought appropriate?
[5] I am satisfied from the Applicants’ evidence that the land applied for is
mineralised. The Application is in a known mineral producing area.
Section 269(4)(c) – If the land applied for is mineralised, will there be an acceptable level
of development and utilisation of the mineral resources within the area applied for?
[6] The material before me reveals the Applicants proposed mining operations and
program, and shows appropriate development and utilisation of the mineral
resources within the area applied for.
Section 269(4)(d) – Is the land and the surface area of that land in respect of which the
mining lease is sought of an appropriate size and shape?
[7] The material before me appears to indicate a mining lease application of an
appropriate size and shape in light of the proposed mining operation.
Section 269(4)(e) – Is the term sought appropriate?
[8] The term sought for this mining lease is 10 years, which I consider appropriate.
Section 269(4)(f) – Has the Applicant the necessary financial and technical capabilities to
carry on mining operations under the proposed mining lease?
1 See s. 251(1) of the Act.
-- 2 of 4 --
[9] The material indicates that the Applicants have the financial and technical
capabilities to carry on the mining operations. I am satisfied that the requirements
of this criterion are met.
Section 269(4)(g) – Has the past performance of the Applicant been satisfactory?
[10] The Applicants’ evidence is that no enforcement action has been taken against
them. The Mining Registrar’s Report is consistent with what the Applicants say.
Section 269(4)(h) – Will any disadvantage result to the holders of existing exploration
permits or mineral development licences or existing applicants for exploration permits or
mineral development licences?
[11] The Applicants held EPM14956. There is nothing in the material to indicate any
disadvantage to any other person.
Section 269(4)(i) – Do the operations to be carried on under the authority of the mining
lease conform with sound land use management?
[12] There is no evidence before me to suggest that the proposed operations do not
conform with sound land use management.
Section 269(4)(j) – Will there be any adverse environmental impacts, and if so, the extent
thereof:
[13] A draft environmental authority was publicly advertised and received no
objection. There is no evidence to suggest that the environmental impacts will not
be adequately dealt with by compliance with the conditions of the authority.
Section 269(4)(k) – Will the public right and interest be prejudiced?
[14] The material before me does not reveal any area of concern for the public right
and interest.
Section 269(4)(l) – Has any good reason been shown for a refusal to grant the mining
lease?
[15] There was no evidence before me that indicated any good reason why this
Application should be refused.
Section 269(4)(m) – Is the proposed mining operation an appropriate land use taking into
consideration the current and prospective uses of the land?
[16] The materials show that the project is for the extraction of a potentially valuable
resource in accordance with the environmental processes. I am satisfied that the
proposed mining operation is an appropriate land use.
Recommendation
[17] Taking into account all the evidence before me and, in particular, that evidence
referred to above, I recommend to the Honourable the Minister for Mines and
-- 3 of 4 --
Energy that, subject to the Applicants completing the necessary Deed pursuant to
the I.L.U.A., Mining Lease No. 60417 be granted over the entire application area
for the purpose and term sought by the Applicants.
-- 4 of 4 --
Official source: https://www.sclqld.org.au/caselaw/QLRT/2006/157