ACI Operations Pty Ltd v Quandamooka Lands Council Aboriginal Corporation (No 4) [2001] QLRT 24

LAND AND RESOURCES TRIBUNAL QUEENSLAND CITATION: Re ACI Operations Pty Ltd (Applicant) and Quandamooka Lands Council Aboriginal Corporation (Objector) [No 4] [2001] QLRT 24 PARTIES: ACI Operations Pty Ltd and Quandamooka Lands Council Aboriginal Corporation FILE NO/S: LXX40043/2000/1 PROCEEDING: Application to set aside previous order constituting Tribunal panel DELIVERED ON: 1 May 2001 DELIVERED AT: Brisbane HEARING DATE: 1 May 2001 PRESIDING MEMBER: Koppenol P ORDER/S: 1. Previous order (direction dated 4 December 2000) constituting 5-Member Tribunal panel set aside. (at [6]) 2. Order that the Tribunal be constituted by a panel comprising the President, Mr D. Webster and Mr S. Martin. (at [6]) CATCHWORDS: MINING – MINING LEASE – APPLICATION FOR – LAND AND RESOURCES TRIBUNAL – PANEL – whether previous order constituting 5-Member panel should be set aside – whether 3-Member panel should be ordered Land and Resources Tribunal Act 1999, ss. 39, 40, 44 Mineral Resources Act 1989, ss. 261, 269(4) COUNSEL: N/A SOLICITORS: Ms Z. Farmer (solicitor), for ACI Operations Pty Ltd (Applicant) Mr S. McDougall (Legal Officer), for Quandamooka Lands Council Aboriginal Corporation (Objector) -- 1 of 3 -- [1] KOPPENOL P: In this matter, I previously ordered,1 having regard to the nature of this case, the number of parties and the issues involved and the provisions of ss. 39, 40 and 44 of the Land and Resources Tribunal Act 1999, that the Tribunal be constituted for this matter by a 5-person panel consisting of myself, Deputy President Kingham, Mr J. Wharton, Mr D. Webster and Mr S. Martin. [2] Subsequently the number of objectors (previously 3) has been reduced to one and the matters in issue have been narrowed significantly. I was informed today that in essence, 4 matters are still in issue (between the parties),2 namely: (1) Whether the applicant failed to comply with (the relevant environmental impact statement requirements of) s. 261 of the Mineral Resources Act 1989; (2) Whether the land in respect of which the mining lease is sought is of an appropriate size and shape; (3) Whether the past performance of the applicant has been satisfactory; and (4) Whether the grant of the lease would not be in the public interest. [3] I was told today by the parties’ lawyers that the first ground will turn on documentary evidence. The second extant ground is said to involve cultural heritage issues and may also involve hydrological evidence. The third extant ground is said to involve evidence from the mine manager and some documentary evidence. The fourth extant ground will involve evidence by both the applicant and the objector. [4] The mining operation planned is said to be a small scale operation. A 10 year term is now sought. Because of the reduction in the number of parties and the reduction in the matters still in issue, the apparent complexity of this case has also been reduced. [5] ACI has applied for me to set aside my previous order constituting the Tribunal 1 Vide Direction dated 4 December 2000. 2 Of course, the Tribunal will still have to take into account and consider each of the 13 matters set out in s. 269(4) of the Mineral Resources Act 1989. -- 2 of 3 -- as a 5-person panel and substituting a 3-person panel. The Quandamooka Lands Council Aboriginal Corporation, the only extant objector, does not oppose this course. [6] In all of the circumstances, I think that it is appropriate that I accede to ACI’s application – and accordingly I set aside my previous order constituting the Tribunal for this matter and now order that in accordance with ss. 39 and 40 of the Land and Resources Tribunal Act, the Tribunal be constituted for this matter by a panel comprising myself, Mr D. Webster and Mr S. Martin. -- 3 of 3 --