209 / 300
of 18 March 1971 the said defendant agreed to sell
these lands to the first plaintiff, Thomas Roche. By a
second agreement of 18 March 1971 the plaintiff,
Roche, agreed to form forthwith a limited company
with a nominal share capital of £1 million. The con-
sideration was £700,000 of which £200,000 was to be
paid by the allotment of 200,000 £1 shares in the
Company, and the balance was to be paid on dates
mentioned in the agreement. The plaintiff Company,
Bula Ltd., was formed in pursuance of said agreement.
On 19 March 1971 Patrick Wright executed a con-
veyance of the lands to the Company. Application was
made to the Land Commission for their consent in the
vesting of the lands to Bula, under Section 45 of the
Land Act, 1965, but such consent had not been forth-
coming in April 1973, when judgment was given in
the High Court.
At this time a prospecting licence had been granted
by the Minister for Industry and Commerce to Tara
Exploration and Development Co. Ltd. (hereafter
called Tara). Mr. Roche was aware there had been
drilling, and that minerals of value had been discovered.
There were preliminary discussions between Mr. Roche
and Mr. Wright at which it was stated that, to the
best of Mr. Wright's knowledge, no order for compul-
sory purchase of the minerals had been made. Finally,
on March 18, in the office of the defendant's solicitors,
the agreement to sell was signed, and £50,000 paid
over. Later the second agreement providing for the
formation of the company was signed and a further
£150,000 was paid over. Later on the same day, Mr.
Roche and his solicitor saw an official in the Depart-
ment of Industry and Commerce, who told him that
he believed a compulsory acquisition order had been
made in respect of the minerals under the lands. Prior
to the signing of the agreement, Mr. Roche's solicitor
had been told by the Geological Survey that there were
no orders affecting these lands. However, on March 15
the Minister made an order under Section 14 of the
Minerals and Development Act, 1940, entitled
"The
Minerals Acquisition
(Nevinstown
and other
Town-
lands, Co. Meath) Order 1971"
vesting in himself in fee
simple all minerals, but notice was only published in
Iris Oifigiuil
on 23 March 1971. On 1 April 1971 the
Minister, acting under Section 13 of the Minerals
Development Act, 1940, undertook that under certain
conditions, he would grant to Tara, or to its subsi-
diary, Tara Mines Ltd., a State Mining Lease under
Part IV of the Act in respect of Nevinstown.
(I) The plaintiffs, Roche and Bula, claim that this
Order of the Minister of March 15 is
ultra vires,
null
and void, because :
(1) A Minerals Acquisition Order under Section 14
can relate only to specific minerals, and not to all
minerals, as stated in the Order.
(2) The Minister could not know whether
all
the
minerals under Nevinstown had been worked.
(3) The Minister has no power to acquire minerals
under Section 14 for the purposes of granting a
State mining lease, because such a lease will not
secure that, in the public interest, the working of
such minerals shall be controlled by the State. The
purpose of the Order was to enable the Minister
to grant a lease, which is
ultra vires
Section 14.
(II) Article 43 of the Constitution prevents the com-
pulsory acquisition of property rights, unless the delimi-
tation of the exercise of those rights is required by the
Common Good. But the Common Good cannot require
the Minister to take the property of an Irish citizen,
and hand it over to a foreign company, otherwise he
would be contravening the Constitution.
(III) In making an Order, the Minister is bound to
act in accordance with the
principles of Natural
Justice.
(a) He should give notice to the owner that he intends
to make such an order.
(b) He should give the owner an opportunity of mak-
ing representations and of being heard.
(IV) The provisions in relation to compensation are
unsatisfactory, as they are based on a nugatory "roy-
alty" rent. If the minerals under any part of Nevins-
town are not worked, no compensation will be paid.
(V) As the Minister did not comply with Section 15,
by failing to publish the "Notice" "as soon as may be"
and as the notice did not indicate precisely the nature
and extent of the minerals acquired, such failure by
the Minister to comply with the statutory requirements
entitles Roche (and Bula Ltd.), as a person affected by
the Order, to have it set aside.
Section 7 of the Minerals Development Act 1940,
dealing with the entering and prospecting for minerals;
Section 8, dealing with prospecting licences; Section 15,
dealing with the publication and services in respect of
mineral acquisition orders; Section 22, dealing with
licences in respect of State acquired minerals; Section
67, dealing with the basis for assessment of compen-
sation in respect of minerals and ancillary rights and
Section 68, dealing with the form of compensation for
State acquired minerals and for unworked mineral
licences are all quoted in full.
The Minister, Mr. Patrick Lawlor, had given evid-
ence on behalf of the defendant. He was satisfied from
a discussion with his officials on February 19 that there
were minerals under these lands that were not being
worked. Prospecting licences had been given to Tara,
as it had been established that considerable quantities
of lead and zinc were to be found in the area, and he
was most anxious to negotiate a lease for the working
of the mines in the area. There would be fragmentation
if he could not control the mining right in the area.
The President thought that the minerals in the area
should be owned by the State in order to ensure their
orderly working. There was nothing sinister in the
dealy in publishing the Order, yet the period of eight
days before publication was unduly long. The fact that
the Order was not published "as soon as may be" does
not invalidate it, but the Minister might be liable in
damages to anyone who in the interval had altered his
position to his disadvantage.
In this case, the decision of the Minister that miner-
als should be acquired is an administrative one, and
is thus not contrary to natural justice. The arguments
under Article 43 are rejected, as in an appropriate case
the common good may require that the Minister should
acquire all minerals in a given area. The Minister did
consider it desirable to acquire all scheduled minerals
in the area and his primary purpose in doing so was to
secure that they should be worked in an orderly fashion.
However, the Ministerial Order must specify the
nature, situation and extent of the minerals to which it
relates. This is an all-embracing Order, and the Min-
ister indicated that he intended to acquire
all
scheduled
minerals. As regards compensation, no machinery has
been devised to compensate an individual for the exis-
tence of unknown minerals. The effect of the present
order is to acquire
all
minerals, known and unknown,
under the plaintiff's land. These minerals may include
207