Wilson still haunts us
The government recently announced plans to amend the Mining Act to address the ramifications of the Forrest and Forrest v Wilson (2017) 262 CLR 510 (“Wilson Case”). Yet, seven years later, we continue to live with the fallout from this decision while waiting for legislative changes.
A case delivered 16 August 2024, Broughton v Bullseye Mining, exemplifies these ongoing challenges. Warden Maughan ruled that the Special Prospecting Licence application P37/9602-S was invalid due to inaccurate marking out and discrepancies between the times listed on Form 20 and Form 21 for pegging.
The applicant, who was self-represented, bore the burden of proving the marking out was accurate—highlighting the risks of self-representation in complex legal matters. In presenting his evidence, the applicant admitted to replacing the datum peg and re-attaching Form 20 twelve minutes later than the time recorded on Forms 20 and 21.
Maughan concluded that this inconsistency alone was sufficient to deny him jurisdiction to hear the case. In paragraph 27 of his decision, the Warden compared coordinates from a photograph taken with a Solocator app on a phone to the coordinates listed on Form 21. The applicant testified that he used a Magellan GPS 6000 to establish the Form 21 coordinates.
It’s important to note that the Magellan GPS 6000, as per its user manual, has a 12-meter accuracy margin, which can vary depending on satellite signal integrity. Similarly, the Solocator app offers a 5-meter accuracy unless triangulation from a nearby phone signal tower is possible—an unlikely scenario given the remote location.
Despite these technical limitations, the Warden deemed a 1- to 3-meter discrepancy between the photographs and Form 21 as excessive. Interestingly, where the coordinates were identical, the assumption was that they reflected the location of the person taking the photos, even though the Solocator app is specifically designed to record the location of the photographed object.
Ultimately, the Warden’s decision underscores the vulnerability of applications due to even minor inaccuracies—raising concerns about the ease with which applications can be deemed invalid under current regulations.
Interpreting the mining act can be complicated, even for experienced tenement managers. Our Advanced Tenement Management course delves into intermediate concepts and issues that tenement managers encounter. With the next course running 19 – 20 September 2024, find out more and book now.
