Part VIII of the Land Act 1996 gives a right of appeal against a Land Board decision. It is short, and every part of it matters.
Section 62 — the appeal
(1) A person aggrieved by a decision of the Land Board may, not later than 28 days after notice is forwarded under section 58(10), forward a notice of appeal to the Minister.
(2) An appeal shall be accompanied by a prescribed fee.
(3) If the Head of State, acting on the advice of the Minister, thinks the appeal has been made on frivolous grounds, he may reject it.
(4) Subject to subsection (5), the Head of State, acting on the advice of the Minister, shall determine the appeal, and his decision is final.
(5) Where an appeal is upheld, the matter may be referred back to the Land Board for re-hearing.
The 28-day limit
The period runs from when notice is forwarded under section 58(10). There is no express power in section 62 to extend it. Treat 28 days as absolute: lodge within it, pay the fee, and keep proof of both.
Who may appeal
A person aggrieved by a decision of the Land Board. That plainly covers an unsuccessful applicant. It is also capable of covering a person who objected at the Board hearing and whose interest in the land is affected — for example an adjoining occupier, or a person claiming the land is customary land.
Being aggrieved is easier to establish if you actually appeared and objected. That is another reason to watch the Gazette for the Board’s list of matters and attend.
This is not an appeal to a court
The appeal goes to the Minister, and is determined by the Head of State acting on the Minister’s advice. It is an internal, executive appeal. Two consequences follow:
- the merits can be reconsidered — which a court would not do on judicial review; but
- the decision-maker is the same arm of government whose Department referred the application to the Board in the first place.
Where the appeal is upheld, the outcome is generally not a substituted grant but a referral back to the Board for re-hearing.
What “final” means — and does not mean
Section 62(4) says the decision is final. That excludes a further appeal on the merits. It does not, by itself, oust the supervisory jurisdiction of the National Court.
Under section 155(3) and (4) of the Constitution, the National Court has an inherent power to review the exercise of judicial authority and to make orders necessary to do justice. A privative clause in an ordinary Act is read narrowly against that background.
Review is available on the usual grounds — that the Board or the Minister exceeded power, took into account irrelevant considerations, failed to take into account mandatory ones, or breached the principles of natural justice under section 59 of the Constitution. Section 60 requires that natural justice be developed having regard to the National Goals.
Section 41 of the Constitution may also be available where an act done under a valid law is nevertheless harsh or oppressive, or disproportionate, in the particular case.
Section 63 — the Minister need not accept the Board
Separately from any appeal, under section 63 the Minister shall, if he disagrees with a Board report or recommendation — and may for any other reason — refer the matter back to the Board for re-hearing, fresh evidence or a further report, or refer it to the National Executive Council. The decision of the Head of State on a matter referred to the NEC is final.
So a favourable Board recommendation is not a grant, and an unfavourable one is not the end.
If you want to appeal
- Date the notice under section 58(10). The 28 days runs from it.
- Draft the notice of appeal identifying the decision, your interest, and the grounds — be specific; “frivolous grounds” can be rejected under section 62(3).
- Pay the prescribed fee and lodge both together.
- Keep proof of lodgement and payment.
- Consider judicial review in parallel where the complaint is about process rather than merits — and take advice on timing, because review has its own time expectations.
- If suing the State, remember the notice requirements of the Claims By and Against the State Act 1996.
Sources
- Land Act 1996 — ss 55–58, 62, 63
- Constitution — ss 41, 59, 60, 155(3), (4)
- Claims By and Against the State Act 1996
- Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints Inc v Kimas [2022] PGSC 96; SC2280
Before relying on anything here, read the current text of the Land Act 1996 and check for later amendments. If a decision matters to you, get advice — start with the Office of the Public Solicitor, or find a firm in the law firms directory.