Armstrong v Salmon [2002] QLRT 106

LAND AND RESOURCES TRIBUNAL QUEENSLAND CITATION: Armstrong v Salmon [2002] QLRT 106 PARTIES: Dean Linsay Armstrong & Lisa Maree Armstrong (Appellants) v Geoffrey Laurence Salmon (Respondent) FILE NO/S: APTP00062/2002 PROCEEDING: Appeal against determination of compensation DELIVERED ON: 18 December 2002 DELIVERED AT: Brisbane HEARING DATE/S: 12 November 2002, Emerald PRESIDING MEMBER: Koppenol P ORDER/S: Appeal dismissed (at [4]) CATCHWORDS: APPEAL – DETERMINATION OF COMPENSATION – ACCESS – COSTS Mineral Resources Act 1989, ss. 281, 282(1), (8) Land and Resources Tribunal Act 1999, ss. 15(1)(b), 39(2), 40(1)(b), 41(2), (4), Sch 1 COUNSEL: N/A SOLICITOR/S: N/A AGENT/S: Mr G.T. Houen, for the Appellants Respondent appeared on his own behalf Background [1] This is an appeal under s. 282 of the Mineral Resources Act 1989 (MRA) against a determination of compensation for the proposed grant of a mining lease over land in the Emerald district. The mining lease was recommended for grant for the purpose of mining sapphire and zircon. The determination was made by a Deputy President of the Tribunal in the sum of $880.1 That amount represented compensation for access ($800) plus the s. 281(4)(e) additional 10% ($80). 1 [2002] QLRT 56. -- 1 of 2 -- [2] The landowners appealed on 2 grounds. The appeal (together with 2 related appeals)2 was heard in Emerald by a Tribunal panel comprising Mr R. Wright, Mr D. Webster and myself; however the decision is ultimately mine alone.3 A view of the subject land was also conducted shortly after the hearing concluded. Grounds of appeal [3] The grounds raised in this appeal related to access and costs and are identical to Grounds 7 (Access) and 8 (Costs) in Armstrong v Salmon [2002] QLRT 104 (the principal judgment). Conclusion and Orders [4] For the reasons set out in the principal judgment, and whilst appreciating with respect to Ground 7 that unlike the principal judgment a specific amount for access (rather than its inclusion in the component for blot on title) was determined by the Deputy President, each of the grounds advanced by the Appellants in this appeal fails. The appeal will therefore be dismissed. 2 Armstrong v Salmon [2002] QLRT 104; Armstrong v Salmon [2002] QLRT 105. 3 Land and Resources Tribunal Act 1999, ss. 40(1)(b), 41(2) & (4), Sch 1; MRA, s. 282(1) & (8). Messrs Wright and Webster are members of the Land Tribunal established under the Aboriginal Land Act 1991 and are thus eligible panel members under ss 15(1)(b) & 39(2) of the LRT Act. -- 2 of 2 --