LEGAL HIGHLIGHTS OF 1999

2000 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 96
Author(s):  
D.M. Young ◽  
A.M. Kennedy
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Competition Policy ◽  
Petroleum Industry ◽  
Gas Storage ◽  
Underground Gas Storage ◽  
Native Title ◽  
National Review ◽  
Alternative State ◽  
Key Issues ◽  
Year 2000

In 1999 there were a number of significant legislative and judicial developments which affected the petroleum industry. Among these, the more significant included:the commencement of a national review of Australia’s off-shore petroleum legislation1 against competition policy principles;the disallowance by the Federal Senate of the Northern Territory’s alternative right to negotiate (RTN) regime;further shifts towards underground gas storage for commercial purposes;the release of draft legislation to replace the Cultural Record (Landscapes Queensland and Queensland Estate) Act; andthe High Court’s2 decision in Yanner v Eaton.Legislative reform continues to be one of the key issues facing the Australian petroleum industry. Recent events concerning the Northern Territory’s and Queensland’s alternative RTN regimes suggest that replacement of the Commonwealth’s RTN regime with alternative State-based regimes is increasingly unlikely, at least while the Senate remains so constituted. Apart from the uncertainties associated with native title, the industry must also contend with ongoing reform of both cultural heritage and petroleum legislation.The challenges for the petroleum industry in the year 2000 will therefore be to persevere whilst continuing to participate in and contribute to the various review processes.

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN NATIVE TITLE LAW AND CULTURAL HERITAGE AFFECTING THE PETROLEUM INDUSTRY—CERTAINTY, BUT AT A PRICE

2004 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 741
Author(s):  
D. Young ◽  
G. Scott ◽  
J. Norris
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Petroleum Industry ◽  
Native Title ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
The Common ◽  
Unexpected Findings

The mosaic of the common law relating to Native Title, which underpins the Native Title and other Acts, continues to be filled in by the courts increasing certainty for all parties. Last year saw the High Court’s Ward decision—the most significant decision for the petroleum industry since Mabo in 1992. Since then there have been three more important decisions, which while not making new law, have shown how the principles enunciated in Ward and Yorta Yorta are being applied. Some of the cases examined include the Daniel and De Rose Hill decisions, which have application to petroleum tenements.This paper will outline the recent developments, and demonstrate how the decisions have reduced uncertainty, thereby narrowing the areas about which negotiation must occur. The hurdle for proving the existence of Native Title remains high.It has not all been in favour of industry, however. Increasingly, Native Title cases, such as Daniels have resulted in unexpected findings that some conventional titles had been invalidly granted. Titles which seemingly ought to have extinguished Native Title have turned out to be invalid, and in many cases irretrievably so. The paper looks at the implications of this for industry as well.

SIGNIFICANCE OF NATIVE TITLE TO THE PETROLEUM INDUSTRY

2002 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 163
Author(s):  
Doug Young ◽  
Stuart MacGregor
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Petroleum Industry ◽  
10Th Anniversary ◽  
High Court ◽  
Native Title ◽  
The Past ◽  
Legislative Amendments ◽  
Offshore Petroleum

This year is the 10th anniversary of the High Court’s decision in Mabo [No 2]. This paper presents a potted version of what has occurred over the past decade and then a more detailed summary of what has happened over the past year, including recent native title and cultural heritage cases and legislative amendments and their impact on both onshore and offshore petroleum explores and producers. It also looks at the issues likely to be considered by the High Court in the long-awaited decision in the Miriuwung Gajerrong (Ward) case.

Influence of added hydrogen on underground gas storage: a review of key issues

2015 ◽  
Vol 73 (11) ◽  
pp. 6927-6937 ◽  
Author(s):  
Viktor Reitenbach ◽  
Leonhard Ganzer ◽  
Daniel Albrecht ◽  
Birger Hagemann
Keyword(s):  
Gas Storage ◽  
Underground Gas Storage ◽  
Key Issues

THE NEGOTIATED PRICE OF CERTAINTY—RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN NATIVE TITLE AGREEMENTS AFFECTING THE PETROLEUM INDUSTRY

2004 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 753
Author(s):  
E.J. Vickery
Keyword(s):  
State Government ◽  
Petroleum Industry ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Native Title ◽  
Negotiated Agreements ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Key Issues ◽  
Key Terms ◽  
Cooper Basin

Development of Native Title agreements for Petroleum continues in parallel with the release of Court decisions on the law of Native Title. Negotiated agreements for three bidding rounds in the South Australian region of the Cooper Basin are now concluded, with exploration underway there and some new commercial production.These agreements were negotiated under the Commonwealth Native Title Act’s ‘Right to Negotiate’. Agreed resolutions are virtually demanded by the competing tensions within the legislative machinery. The need for conjunctivity of title from the exploration to the development stages is now understood and has become accepted by advocates for Native Title claimants. Recent court decisions would appear to ease the path for applications to the National Native Title Tribunal where negotiations fail to reach agreement, expanding the range of strategies open to Petroleum explorers seeking new title grants.Small negotiating teams facilitated progress. Despite a long first negotiation, subsequent negotiations have developed from that experience to form an efficient and cost-effective model which has now been replicated for more than 35 agreements conjunctive for all phases of activity. All those agreements address the key issues of title grants, both initially and consequently upon discoveries, Aboriginal heritage inspections and accommodation, including practical aides of indicative timelines and budgets for the latter, and compensation. Adaptation of these agreements is beginning in other parts of Australia. The temptation of Native Title advocates to test the envelope, however, must be expected with each new negotiation. Contrastingly, both the industry and state government agencies are seeking stabilisation of the terms of negotiated agreements to see how they will work in practice.This paper describes the key terms and temptations encountered so far in this evolving dynamic.

CULTURAL HERITAGE AND THE PETROLEUM INDUSTRY

2006 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 611 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Scott
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Petroleum Industry ◽  
Heritage Management ◽  
Duty Of Care ◽  
Cultural Heritage Management ◽  
High Court ◽  
Native Title ◽  
Indigenous Groups ◽  
Management Plans ◽  
Heritage Legislation

Since the introduction of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) and its subsequent amendment in 1998, the main focus for developing pipeline projects was on native title issues. Cultural heritage was seen as a more operational matter and not one that would affect the ability to operate or construct pipelines. With higher standards being set by the High Court for native title claimants to maintain a claim, the management of cultural heritage issues (as opposed to the protection of native title rights) are now forming a significant part of negotiations between project proponents and indigenous groups for the development of petroleum projects.State, Territory and Commonwealth legislation dealing with Aboriginal cultural heritage also provides a more immediate source of obligations on project proponents. Even when all regulatory authorities and approvals are held, this legislation can provide affected parties the ability to stop projects if proponents ignore the requirements to protect and manage Aboriginal cultural heritage.This paper briefly examines how cultural heritage issues and native title issues interact from a practical viewpoint and then goes on to provide an overview of cultural heritage legislation throughout Australia including a focus on the unique model adopted in Queensland through the introduction of the ‘cultural heritage duty of care’.This paper then provides examples of what companies will need to do to comply with statutory obligations in minimising harm to cultural heritage through examples of common inclusions in cultural heritage management plans, together with identifying issues that are often forgotten to the detriment of a project in such plans. It also points out why cultural heritage issues may need more immediate actions in comparison with native title issues for the development and construction of new petroleum projects.

Some Key Issues Concerning Further Development of China’s Anti-Monopoly Law

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wang Xianlin
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Industrial Policy ◽  
Competition Policy ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Antitrust Enforcement ◽  
Judicial Process ◽  
Intellectual Property Law ◽  
Strict Compliance ◽  
Key Issues ◽  
Further Development

Since the Anti-Monopoly Law was enforced in China more than eight years ago, important achievements have occurred, as well as challenges for further development. In addition to challenges relating to amending legislation, strengthening enforcement, improving the judicial process, and ensuring strict compliance, etc, there are four issues that will be focused on here, namely: taking monopoly industries as a breakthrough to further promote the enforcement of China’s Anti-Monopoly Law (both administrative and civil antitrust enforcement should focus on prominent monopolistic conducts in typical monopoly industries); properly handling the coordination between industrial policy and competition policy; promoting the cooperation between the Anti-Monopoly Law and intellectual property law; and cultivating China’s competition culture.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document