-
1 month ago | 
lexology.com | David Suttner |Emily Rigg |Angus Paterson |Kate Fisher
In Regis Resources Limited v Cleary in her capacity as Mining Warden [2024] WASC 427, the Supreme Court (Court) upheld the Warden’s finding that the…
Please login or register to continue reading.
Register
-
1 month ago | 
lexology.com | David Suttner |Emily Rigg |Angus Paterson |Kate Fisher
Wayne Craig Van Blitterswyk v Craig Steven West [2024] WAMW 50 (West) and Richard Czornowol and Stephen Howe v Ross Frederick Crew [2024] WAMW 52 (Crew) provided a timely reminder of the importance of complying with the Mining Act 1978’s (Act) marking out requirements. WestBackgroundIn West, Mr West objected to Mr Van Blitterswyk’s (Applicant) application for a prospecting licence, asserting non-compliance with the marking out requirements of the Act.
-
1 month ago | 
lexology.com | David Suttner |Emily Rigg |Angus Paterson |Kate Fisher
In Mt Roe Mining Pty Ltd v Pilbara Energy Company Pty Ltd & Ors [2024] WAMW 41 the Warden considered when it is permissible, and in accordance with the Mining Act 1978 (WA) (Act), for a “No Mining” condition to be imposed upon an exploration license. BackgroundIn this matter, Mt Roe Mining Pty Ltd (Applicant) sought a recommendation for the grant of an exploration licence (Application).
-
1 month ago | 
lexology.com | David Suttner |Emily Rigg |Angus Paterson |Kate Fisher
In a number of recent cases, the Perth Mining Wardens have found current tenement holders liable for the non-compliance of their unrelated predecessors, while foreshadowing increased penalties in forfeiture cases. In Department of Energy, Mines, Industry Regulation and Safety v Phillip Andrew Dignam [2024] WAMW 43, Warden Maughan considered an application for forfeiture where the Form 5 was filed four days late. Approximately one month after that late filing, the tenement was sold.
-
1 month ago | 
lexology.com | David Suttner |Emily Rigg |Angus Paterson |Kate Fisher
In Drem Pty Limited v LRL (AUST) Pty Ltd [2024] NSWSC 1422, the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Court) addressed a dispute concerning royalty obligations under historical deeds related to mining tenements at Kathleen Valley, Western Australia.
-
Feb 21, 2024 | 
lexology.com | David Suttner |Emily Rigg |Angus Paterson
In Fox Coal Pty Ltd & Anor v Minister for Resources [2023] QSC 197 the Queensland Supreme Court set aside the Minister’s decision to refuse Fox Coal’s application for a mineral development licence (MDL Application), pursuant to s186(2) of the Mineral Resources Act 1989 (Qld) (MRA), on the basis that the Minister considered the grant was not in the public interest.
-
Feb 21, 2024 | 
lexology.com | David Suttner |Emily Rigg |Angus Paterson
In Bullseye Mining Limited v WA Prospectors Pty Ltd & Anor [2023] WAMW 47, Warden Cleary reinforced that evidence of the plans for a tenement is vital, and can be determinative, in certain exemption applications. The Warden clarified that:an applicant for exemption need not justify the non-compliance giving rise to the application but must satisfy the criteria for exemption.
-
Feb 21, 2024 | 
lexology.com | David Suttner |Emily Rigg |Angus Paterson
In Riversgold (Australia) Pty Ltd v McPhee in his capacity as Mining Warden [2023] WASC 375, the Supreme Court confirmed that, where an exemption is sought under s 102(2)(b) of the Act on the basis that time is required to raise capital, the purpose of that capital raising must be to permit evaluation of work done on the tenement, or to plan or conduct exploration or mining on the tenement.
-
Feb 21, 2024 | 
lexology.com | David Suttner |Angus Paterson |Emily Rigg
The Perth Mining Wardens have repeatedly and unanimously determined that section 58(1)(b) of the Mining Act 1978 (Act) requires exploration licence applications to contain details of exploration plans and estimated expenditure for the full five-year term, and full licence area, and that non-compliant applications are invalid (see Golden Pig Enterprises Pty Ltd v O’Sullivan [2021] WASC 396, True Fella Pty Ltd v Pantoro South Pty Ltd [2022] WAMW 19, Azure Minerals Ltd v D & G Geraghty Pty Ltd...
