The High Court has set aside a valuation decision concerning the capped tailings management facility at the former Lisheen Mine near Moyne, Thurles, and sent the dispute back for a fresh determination.
Mr Justice Garrett Simons held that the Valuation Tribunal had not adequately explained how it valued the structure or which valuation method it ultimately adopted. The appeal must now be reconsidered by a differently constituted tribunal panel.
Mining at Lisheen began in 1999 and ended in 2015. The disputed facility was constructed to contain potentially hazardous waste, known as mine tailings, produced during the extraction of lead and zinc ore. Its lined base and containment walls prevent contaminated liquid escaping into the environment.
The facility is now full and capped. Under the relevant development consents, the mine operator must continue monitoring it for 30 years and satisfy authorities, principally the Environmental Protection Agency, that it remains environmentally stable.
Vedanta Resources argued that once the facility could no longer receive additional mine waste, it had reached the end of its useful life. The Commissioner of Valuation maintained that it remained in use because it continued storing waste and enabled the operator to meet its aftercare obligations.
That disagreement made the valuation method particularly important. The Commissioner argued for the contractor’s method, which estimates the cost of replacing the property, allows for depreciation and applies a statutory five per cent decapitalisation rate to derive a notional annual rent.
The High Court found that the tribunal’s January 2024 determination discussed that method, comparable properties and the rent a hypothetical tenant might pay, but never made clear which approach it selected.
Mr Justice Simons said the High Court could not substitute its own assessment because a case stated is not a rehearing on the merits. The tribunal had to provide enough reasoning to allow the parties and the court to understand its decision.
The determination was therefore set aside and remitted. The court provisionally deferred any costs decision until the valuation appeal is finally resolved.