Denison Resources Ltd & Anor v Smith & Anor [1993] QMW 147

THE MINING ACT 1968 - 1986. REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF WARDEN PURSUANT TO SECTION 21 OF THE MINING ACT 1968 IN RESPECT OF MLA. 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2015, and 2293. BEFORE: F.W.WINDRIDGE. WARDEN. APPLICANT: DENISON RESOURCES LTD. & ANOR (for 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013,, 2015.) and DENISON RESOURCES LTD. (for 2293) OBJECTORS: S.G. & P.M. SMITH on all except 2015. REPORT: The above applications for a mining lease for the purpose of mining for gold were marked out and lodged at the Wardens Office Clermont on the following dates: Number. Marked Out. Lodged. COA issued. MLA 2010 16.4.86 22.4.86 18.9.86 MLA 2011 16.4.86 22.4.86 18.9.86 MLA 2012 16.4.86 22.4.86 18.9.86 MLA 2013 17.4.86 22.4.86 18.9.86 MLA 2015 17.4.86 22.4.86 28.11.86 MLA 2293 9.11.87 13.11.87 08.08.88 Objections to the grant of the leases were filed as follows: MLA 2010 S.G. & P.M. SMITH on 13.10.86. [1993] QMW 147 -- 1 of 6 -- MLA 2011 S.G. & P.M. SMITH on 13.10.86 and J.S.BURNETT on 10.10.86 MLA 2012 S.G. & P.M. SMITH on 13.10.86 and J.S.BURNETT on 10.10.86 MLA 2013 S.G. & P.M. SMITH on 31.10.86 and J.S.BURNETT on 10.10.86 MLA 2015 J.S.BURNETT on 10.10.86 MLA 2293 S.G. & P.M. SMITH on 2.2.88 Having disposed of his interest in his property, the objections by BURNETT were withdrawn on 2/2/93, leaving objections by SG & PM Smith as the only remaining objectors to MLA's 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2293. The date for hearing having been set prior to the commencement of the Minerals Resources Act 1989, each application is treated as an application under the now repealed Mining Act 1968 - 1986. M/s Jennifer BRIGHT, Solicitor, appeared as town agent for McGilvrays who are acting for Denison Resources. Mr. Tony Appleton, Solicitor, appeared for the objectors Smith. The following matter have been taken into account and considered in making my recommendation. A. HAVE THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT BEEN OBSERVED. Declarations of posting and advertising have been lodged and are attached to the Registrars file. Therefore, prima facie, the requirements of the act in relation to those matters have -- 2 of 6 -- been observed. There is no evidence to suggest otherwise. B. WILL THE PUBLIC INTEREST OR RIGHT BE PREJUDICIALLY AFFECTED IF THE MINING LEASE IS GRANTED. It is necessary to record part of the history of these applications and other mining tenements to fill in the background. Apart from these applications, there are a number of other mining leases in the Clermont area currently held by Denison Resources Ltd. At least as far as the current applications were concerned, on 30 June 1988 , a 50% interest in the applications was assigned to CHINA GEOLOGY IMPORT AND EXPORT PTY LTD CORPORATION (AUSTRALIA). This assignment was approved by the Hon. the Minister on 8 November 1988. Special conditions were set and forwarded to the applicants on 23.12.1991. Caveats lodged over the applications by McKEE and HEALY were removed on 22 October 1992. On 11 December 1992, consent for the assignments of the lease applications to Mr. Phillip J. SMITH was given. I understand from M/s Bright who formerly represented the assignor SMITH that the contract to purchase the tenements including the applications has not been fulfilled, and the assignments have accordingly lapsed. It appears that the -- 3 of 6 -- applications and existing granted tenements are for sale through the receivers and managers appointed for Denison Resources, on behalf of Denison Resources and China Geology Import and Export Pty. Ltd. Corporation (Australia). These matters have been set for hearing a number of times this year, namely 2/2/93, 1/4/93, 6/7/93, and 7/9/93. The principal reason for the hearing not proceeding was that the intended purchaser would be required to submit the evidence in relation to mineralisation and financial capacity . Obviously the receivers and managers were not in a position to do this. Basically, these applications are in the same position as they were on the date of filing of the application. No person or company have appeared to give evidence of mineralisation to the extent that justifies the granting of a lease. No person or company have appeared to give evidence as to their financial capability and technical resources available for the development of the leases. Any intending purchaser would be required to accept the special conditions already set, prepare an EMOS and submit a Mine Working Plan for approval. M/s Bright applied for an adjournment on the basis that the applications are for sale and current rentals are paid up to 31 March 1994. Mr. Appleton for the objector objected to any further adjournments and pointed out that the objector has in effect had a "blot on title" for seven years, and the holding, being a small holding has been virtually unsaleable while the -- 4 of 6 -- applications are pending. On the grounds that the applications have been pending for some seven years, it must be found that this is not "managing the mineral and energy resources for the benefit of the community". I also find that there is no evidence of mineralisation to justify the granting of the leases. There is no evidence of the financial capacity of the current applicants or the technical resources of the applicants available to develop the lease applications. I consider it is not in the public interest to have the ground tied up for some seven years while an insolvent applicant attempts to sell the applications as part of a fire sale to satisfy creditors, bearing in mind that the grant of a lease does not create any estate or interest in the land. Any sale in the near future would not progress the applications any further. In view of the fact that there has been no development on the other leases held by the principal applicant (Denison Resources), no royalty has been paid on production, and no employment has been generated, the Department might well look at releasing those other tenements. Considering the above matters, I am satisfied that: (1) the provisions of the Act have been complied with, but (2) the public right and interest will be prejudicially affected by the granting of the applications. -- 5 of 6 -- RECOMMENDATION. I recommend to the Hon. the Minister that the applications be not granted on the ground that the public right and interest will be prejudicially affected by the granting of the applications. Dated at Brisbane this 13th day of September 1993. F.W.WINDRIDGE. MINING WARDEN. -- 6 of 6 --