Martin v Minister for Resources and Energy [2012] NSWLEC 241

Martin v Minister for Resources and Energy [2012] NSWLEC 241

Because exploration licence EL 7850 had been cancelled under s 125 of the Mining Act 1992 before the hearing, there was no existing licence whose validity could be questioned, and any declaration would be abstract or academic and an abuse of process. The contempt claim was unsustainable because there was no interlocutory injunction or formal undertaking restraining the State from issuing the licence. The summons was therefore dismissed, with no order as to costs because the cancellation was not within the applicant's control and followed Hei Long Pty Ltd's entitlement to apply for cancellation.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 October 2012
Procedural Posture
Class 8 Judicial Review Proceeding Concerning an Exploration Licence Under the Mining Act 1992 / Ex Tempore Judgment on Summons
Outcome
The summons was dismissed, with no order as to costs, and the exhibit may be returned.
Legal Topics
['judicial Review' 'exploration Licence' 'declaratory Relief' 'contempt of Court' 'abuse of Process' 'costs']
['administrative Law' 'mining Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['judicial Review' 'exploration Licence' 'declaratory Relief' 'contempt of Court' 'abuse of Process' 'costs']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Class 8 Judicial Review Proceeding Concerning an Exploration Licence Under the Mining Act 1992 / Ex Tempore Judgment on Summons

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether exploration licence EL 7850 should be declared null and void after it had been cancelled under s 125 of the Mining Act 1992.' 'Whether the Minister should be directed to give effect to a declaration concerning the licence.' 'Whether the State was in contempt in matter No 80001 of 2011 by granting exploration licence EL 7850 to Hei Long Pty Ltd.' 'Whether any order as to costs should be made.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because exploration licence EL 7850 had been cancelled under s 125 of the Mining Act 1992 before the hearing, there was no existing licence whose validity could be questioned, and any declaration would be abstract or academic and an abuse of process. The contempt claim was unsustainable because there was no interlocutory injunction or formal undertaking restraining the State from issuing the licence. The summons was therefore dismissed, with no order as to costs because the cancellation was not within the applicant's control and followed Hei Long Pty Ltd's entitlement to apply for cancellation.

Court Disposition

The summons was dismissed, with no order as to costs, and the exhibit may be returned.

Orders

  • ['The summons is dismissed.' 'There will be no order as to costs.' 'The exhibit may be returned.']