Cominelli and Bonazzi v Lake View and Star Limited [1934] HCA 36

Cominelli and Bonazzi v Lake View and Star Limited [1934] HCA 36

The agreement made between the tributers and the company, purporting to settle for less than the statutory half-share of premiums from gold sales as required by sec. 152(b) of the Mining Act 1904-1923 (W.A.), was contrary to the public policy underlying the statute and therefore void and ineffectual. The statutory requirement applies regardless of the parties’ agreement to settle otherwise, for past and future claims. The Warden’s order for an account pursuant to the Act must be restored.

Parties
Appellant: Cominelli; Appellant: Bonazzi; Respondent: The Lake View and Star Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From the Supreme Court of Western Australia
Outcome
Appeal allowed with costs.
Legal Topics
Statutory Interpretation, Illegality of Contract, Remuneration of Tributers, Public Policy
Mining Law Contracts Statutory Interpretation Illegality of Contract Remuneration of Tributers Public Policy

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 3 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cominelli

Appellant

Bonazzi

Appellant

The Lake View and Star Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From the Supreme Court of Western Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an agreement by tributers to accept less than the statutory entitlement under Mining Act 1904-1923 (W.A.) sec. 152(b) is valid and enforceable
  2. 2 Whether amounts received by a mining company due to exchange rates or increased gold price are 'premiums' within the meaning of sec. 152(b)
  3. 3 Whether any part of an executed settlement agreement can operate as a valid compromise of statutory entitlements for past or future claims

Ratio Decidendi

The agreement made between the tributers and the company, purporting to settle for less than the statutory half-share of premiums from gold sales as required by sec. 152(b) of the Mining Act 1904-1923 (W.A.), was contrary to the public policy underlying the statute and therefore void and ineffectual. The statutory requirement applies regardless of the parties’ agreement to settle otherwise, for past and future claims. The Warden’s order for an account pursuant to the Act must be restored.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed with costs.

Orders

  • Order of the Supreme Court of Western Australia set aside.
  • Appeal from the Warden to the Supreme Court dismissed with costs.