Heggies Bulkhaul v Global Minerals [2002] NSWSC 410

Heggies Bulkhaul v Global Minerals [2002] NSWSC 410

The plaintiff produced Exhibit LFH 1 in purported compliance with the Court's order although senior officers knew, or ought to have known, that it was deficient and unreliable as a record of product sales revenue distinct from haulage. The defendant relied on that material for months, including through substantial hearings, and had not been given an adequate opportunity to examine the documents needed to calculate royalties. The resulting delay was caused by the plaintiff's own conduct, so the hearing dates should be vacated and a Court-appointed expert should determine royalty amounts for 10 November 1995 to 30 April 2002. The plaintiff's misconduct created a false basis for both the...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 May 2002
Procedural Posture
Equity Proceedings in Which the Plaintiff Sought Specific Performance of an Alleged Long Term Quarry Lease and the Defendant Cross Claimed for Tenancy Breaches / Defendant's Application During a Part Heard Expedited Hearing to Vacate Further Hearing Dates, Allow Inquiry Into Royalties, and Seek Indemnity Costs
Outcome
Defendant's application granted; hearing dates vacated; expert inquiry into royalties to be ordered; plaintiff to pay defendant's indemnity costs of the April and May applications.
Legal Topics
['vacation of Hearing Dates' 'court Appointed Expert' 'royalty Calculations' 'compliance With Court Orders' 'indemnity Costs' 'relief Against Forfeiture']
['practice and Procedure' 'costs' 'equity' 'property and Leases'] ['vacation of Hearing Dates' 'court Appointed Expert' 'royalty Calculations' 'compliance With Court Orders' 'indemnity Costs' 'relief Against Forfeiture']

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 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Equity Proceedings in Which the Plaintiff Sought Specific Performance of an Alleged Long Term Quarry Lease and the Defendant Cross Claimed for Tenancy Breaches / Defendant's Application During a Part Heard Expedited Hearing to Vacate Further Hearing Dates, Allow Inquiry Into Royalties, and Seek Indemnity Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether further hearing dates should be vacated because the plaintiff had provided inaccurate royalty information in purported compliance with a Court order' 'Whether orders should be made for a Court-appointed expert to determine the royalties properly payable by the plaintiff to the defendant' "What period should be covered by the expert's inquiry into royalty obligations" "Whether the plaintiff should pay the defendant's costs of the April and May applications on an indemnity basis"]

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff produced Exhibit LFH 1 in purported compliance with the Court's order although senior officers knew, or ought to have known, that it was deficient and unreliable as a record of product sales revenue distinct from haulage. The defendant relied on that material for months, including through substantial hearings, and had not been given an adequate opportunity to examine the documents needed to calculate royalties. The resulting delay was caused by the plaintiff's own conduct, so the hearing dates should be vacated and a Court-appointed expert should determine royalty amounts for 10 November 1995 to 30 April 2002. The plaintiff's misconduct created a false basis for both the...

Court Disposition

Defendant's application granted; hearing dates vacated; expert inquiry into royalties to be ordered; plaintiff to pay defendant's indemnity costs of the April and May applications.

Orders

  • ['Hearing dates of 7 and 8 May 2002 vacated.' 'Matter stood over to 13 May 2002 for orders for determination by a court-appointed expert of the amount of royalties properly payable by the plaintiff to the defendant under the lease for the period 10 November 1995 to 30 April 2002.' "Plaintiff to pay the defendant's...