Burragubba v Minister for Natural Resources and Mines

[2017] QCA 179

Queensland Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Administrative Law
2. › Judicial review
3. › Grounds of review
4. › Procedural fairness
5. › Procedures provided by statute
6. › Whether statutory scheme for objections to mining lease grant excluded common law right to procedural fairness
7. › Whether detailed procedural code displaced implied requirement of natural justice
8. › Mineral Resources Act 1989 (Qld), ss 234(1), 260(1), 265, 267, 269, 271A
1. Administrative Law
2. › Judicial review
3. › Grounds of review
4. › Procedural fairness
5. › New matters not before recommending body
6. › Whether decision-maker obliged to consult affected party on new matter not considered by Land Court
7. › Whether appellants proved material adverse to their interests was considered
1. Mining and Resources
2. › Mining leases
3. › Grant of mining lease
4. › Interaction with native title
5. › Future acts under Native Title Act 1993 (Cth)
6. › Whether Minister's finding that native title had been 'resolved' meant extinguished or that future act determination had been made
7. › Native Title Act 1993 (Cth), ss 24OA, 38, 233

Quick Take

The MRA's statutory scheme for objections to mining lease grants informs the content of the duty to act with procedural fairness but does not displace it. A person who has not lodged an objection under the MRA may still be entitled to procedural fairness if the Minister considers new matters adverse to their interests that were not before the Land Court. However, the burden lies on the person claiming denial of natural justice to prove that the Minister actually considered material adverse to their interests.