The appeal by a mining licence applicant (Vinland) from a Supreme Court decision returning Vinland’s appeal to the Mineral Rights Adjudication Board (the “Board”) for re-determination was dismissed where the Court found that the Board had jurisdiction to determine the Appeal but had failed to provide sufficient reasons in reaching its decision

25. March 2008 0
Administrative law – Natural resources – Mining leases – Staking requirements – Judicial review – Jurisdiction of tribunal – Natural justice – Failure to provide reasons – Evidence – Burden of proof Newfoundland and Labrador (Mineral Claims Recorder) v. Vinland Resources Ltd., [2008] N.J. No. 48, Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme Court – Court of Appeal, ...

An appeal pursuant to section 40(8) of the Mineral Tenure Act was allowed as the court found that the Chief Gold Commissioner erred in finding that there had not been a good faith attempt by the Appellant to comply with the staking requirements of the Act with respect to his mining claim and the Appellant’s non-compliance did not have a tendency to mislead

27. July 2004 0
Administrative law – Natural resources – Mining leases – Gold Commissioner – Staking requirements – Judicial review – Administrative decisions – Appeals – Compliance with legislation Tyerman v. Kreft, [2004] B.C.J. No. 1016, British Columbia Supreme Court, May 19, 2004, E.R.A. Edwards J. The Appellant brought an appeal pursuant to section 40(8) of the Mineral Tenure ...