Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage (Submerged Lands) Registration Fees Act 1982

The Act’s direct operation concerns parties whose transactions involve registration of a title transfer under s 78 of the principal Act or approval of a dealing under s 81. Section 4 says the fee is payable to the Minister in respect of the relevant register entry. The text does not identify which party to a transaction must ultimately bear the economic cost between themselves; that could depend on arrangements outside this Act.

For transfers, s 4(2) applies to an entry in the register of a memorandum recording transfer of a title. The parties may be affected by a fee calculated by reference to the greater of consideration or title value, subject to the prescribed minimum. Sections 4(3) and 4(4) can limit the transfer-entry fee to the prescribed amount where their stated conditions are met.

For dealings, s 4(5) applies to an entry recording approval of a dealing. The relevant parties may be affected by a fee calculated from consideration, an allocated share of consideration where approval relates to multiple titles, or, in a narrower case, the value of the interest. Section 4(6) sets out minimum-fee situations, while s 4(7) provides a prescribed-amount treatment for qualifying dealings between related bodies corporate.

The Minister is an important decision-maker under the provisions. The Minister determines the value of qualifying exploration works for the s 4(8) deduction and must be satisfied about certain matters under ss 4(4), 4(5)(b)(iii) and 4(7). The text does not specify application procedures, evidence requirements, assessment timeframes or review rights.

The Act does not state that it applies to every petroleum-related transaction. Its charges attach to the register entries and approval processes it identifies.

The central financial obligation is payment of the fee associated with the relevant register entry. Section 4(2) imposes a 1.5% fee for entry of a memorandum of title transfer, calculated on the greater of the consideration for the transfer and the value of the title. If that calculation produces less than the prescribed amount, the prescribed amount is payable. The text does not give that minimum’s dollar figure.

Section 4(3) limits the fee on the final transfer entry to the prescribed amount where a fee under the Act has already been paid for entry of approval of an instrument or dealing under which the transfer was agreed, and the ordinary transfer fee would otherwise exceed the prescribed amount. The provision is tied to the transfer being executed to give effect to that earlier instrument or dealing.

Section 4(4) provides a similar prescribed-amount treatment for some transfers between related bodies corporate. The parties must satisfy the Minister that they are related bodies corporate, that the transfer was made solely for a corporate reorganisation or better administration, and that it was not made substantially to avoid or reduce fees. The ordinary fee must also be more than the prescribed amount.

For dealings, s 4(5) generally charges 1.5% of the consideration, divided by the number of titles where the Minister approves the dealing in relation to multiple titles. An alternative value base applies only where the interest value is greater, the dealing has an effect specified in s 81(1)(a), (b) or (d), and the Minister is satisfied that it was not pursuant to another dealing or instrument for which a fee was paid. Section 4(8) requires deduction of the Minister-determined value of qualifying exploration works. These provisions create calculation rules, but the supplied text does not specify a general right to a refund or an appeal process.

The supplied Act text does not set out criminal offences, civil penalties, imprisonment, late-payment interest, recovery proceedings, or a penalty for providing incorrect information. It is therefore not possible, from this Act alone, to describe a penalty regime for non-payment or non-compliance. That is a limit of the material supplied, not a basis to conclude that no relevant consequence exists elsewhere.

The enforcement mechanism visible in the text is the charging of a fee in connection with a register entry or approval. Sections 4(2) and 4(5) say the fee is payable to the Minister “in respect of” the relevant entry. The text does not say whether payment is a precondition to processing, whether an unpaid fee becomes a debt, or what administrative steps follow non-payment. Those questions may depend on the principal Act, regulations or other applicable provisions, none of which are reproduced in full here.

The Minister’s satisfaction is expressly relevant to some fee calculations and reductions. Under s 4(4), the parties must satisfy the Minister about corporate relationship, purpose and fee-avoidance matters for a qualifying transfer. Under s 4(5)(b)(iii), the Minister must be satisfied that the dealing was not pursuant to an earlier dealing or instrument for which a fee was paid. Under s 4(7), similar satisfaction requirements apply to a qualifying related-body-corporate dealing. Under s 4(8), the Minister determines the value of qualifying exploration works.

Those decision points may affect the amount payable. The text does not prescribe how the Minister must evaluate supporting material, identify reasons for a decision, or provide internal or external review. Any account of those procedures would require sources beyond the supplied Act.

Section 3 expressly provides that this Act is “incorporated, and shall be read as one”, with the Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage (Submerged Lands) Act 1982. The fee provisions depend on that principal Act’s processes: s 4(2) refers to transfer under s 78, while s 4(5) and related subsections refer to dealings and approval under s 81. The supplied text does not reproduce those principal Act provisions, so it does not establish the full scope of the transactions they cover or their procedural requirements.

The Act also refers to the Commonwealth Corporations Act 2001 for the meaning of “related bodies corporate” in ss 4(4) and 4(7). That external definition is relevant to the reduced-fee provisions, but its content is not included here. The State Act requires the parties to satisfy the Minister that they meet the relationship and purpose conditions set out in the relevant subsection.

Section 4(5)(b) refers specifically to effects of the kind in s 81(1)(a), (b) or (d) of the principal Act. That cross-reference is material because the alternative interest-value base is not available for every dealing under the wording supplied. The contents of those paragraphs need to be checked in the principal Act before classifying a particular dealing.

The 1990 amendment notes also preserve an historical interaction: the note reproduces s 6 of the Petroleum (Submerged Lands) Registration Fees Amendment Act 1990, which says the principal Act continues to apply to certain transfers under s 78 by operation of s 201(3) of the Acts Amendment (Petroleum) Act 1990. The note identifies a transitional rule, but does not explain its present application to any particular transaction.

Section 4A permits regulations. No regulations are included in the supplied material, so prescribed amounts and any related procedural detail cannot be confirmed from this source.

The compilation table records the principal enactment as the Petroleum (Submerged Lands) Registration Fees Act 1982, Act No. 34 of 1982. It received assent on 27 May 1982 and commenced on 14 February 1983, as recorded in the table by reference to s. 2(1) and a Gazette notice dated 25 February 1983. Section 2 of the present text says commencement was tied to commencement of the Petroleum (Submerged Lands) Act 1982 and required the Minister to publish commencement notice in the Gazette as soon as practicable.

The compilation identifies the Petroleum (Submerged Lands) Registration Fees Amendment Act 1990, Act No. 13 of 1990. Sections 1 and 2 commenced on 31 July 1990, and the rest commenced on 1 October 1990. The current text marks s. 4 as inserted by that Act and s. 4A as inserted by it. The note also reproduces a transitional application provision from the 1990 Act.

The Corporations (Consequential Amendments) Act (No. 2) 2003, Pt 19, is recorded as Act No. 20 of 2003, assented to on 23 April 2003, with commencement stated as 15 July 2001. The current s. 4 notes amendments by that Act. The Petroleum and Energy Legislation Amendment Act 2010, s. 185, commenced on 25 May 2011 and is also listed as amending s. 4.

The 2024 amendment is the Petroleum Legislation Amendment Act 2024, Pt 5 Div 11, Act No. 17 of 2024. The table states assent on 14 May 2024 and commencement on 28 May 2026, citing s. 2(b) and SL 2026/70 cl. 2. It amended the long title, ss 1, 3 and 4. The compilation does not explain the policy rationale or detailed effect of each amendment beyond the marked provisions.

The supplied legislation compilation contains no case names, court or tribunal decisions, reported litigation, or summaries of disputes concerning the Act. That means this source supports no account of how a court has interpreted the fee formula, prescribed amount, Ministerial satisfaction requirements, or the exploration-works deduction. It also does not establish that no litigation has occurred; absence of case material in this compilation is not evidence that there are no relevant decisions.

The text identifies several points that could matter in a dispute, without resolving how they would be interpreted. These include which value is the greater for a transfer under s 4(2), what counts as consideration for a dealing under s 4(5), how consideration is divided across multiple titles, and how the Minister determines exploration-work value under s 4(8). For related-body-corporate transactions, the statutory conditions include purpose and whether the transaction was made substantially to avoid or reduce fees. The Act itself does not state an evidentiary test or explain how those phrases have been applied.

The principal Act may contain processes relevant to approval, registration or review, but it is not reproduced in full. Likewise, the text refers to the Corporations Act 2001 and regulations made under s 4A without providing their operative provisions. No litigation conclusion should be drawn from this source alone.

A source-grounded research note can therefore identify the statutory questions but cannot report judicial answers. In particular, it would be necessary to consult suitable case-law sources and the full operative legislation before stating whether any interpretation has been adopted by a court, whether a decision has been reviewed, or whether the statutory language has been judicially qualified. The compilation table is an amendment record, not a litigation record.

The 1.5% rate is not always calculated on the same base. For a transfer under s 4(2), it is applied to whichever is greater: consideration or title value. For a dealing under s 4(5), the ordinary base is consideration, with an allocation across titles where the dealing is approved in relation to more than one title. A separate interest-value base applies only if the conditions in s 4(5)(b) are met. Treating every transaction as a simple percentage of its stated price would miss these distinctions.

The prescribed amount matters in several different ways. It is a minimum under ss 4(2) and 4(6), and it is the reduced fee for the qualifying cases in ss 4(3), 4(4) and 4(7). The amount itself is not stated in the supplied text, so the calculation cannot be completed from this Act alone.

The related-body-corporate provisions are conditional, not automatic. The parties must satisfy the Minister about the corporate relationship and the specified purpose, and the transfer or dealing must not have been made substantially to avoid or reduce fees. The prescribed-amount outcome also requires that the ordinary fee would be more than the prescribed amount.

The exploration deduction in s 4(8) is limited to exploration works required or permitted under the relevant title when the application for dealing approval was lodged. The Minister determines their value. The text does not say that any proposed expenditure, or any later work, is deductible.

Finally, the compilation table gives 28 May 2026 as the commencement date for the 2024 amending Act. A transaction’s applicable wording may therefore depend on its date and the commencement status of the amendments. The supplied compilation does not explain how transitional issues affect a particular transaction.

The Act’s structure suggests a practical sequence for analysing a potential fee, though this is general information rather than a transaction-specific conclusion. First identify the register event: is there an entry of a memorandum of title transfer under s 78, or an entry of approval of a dealing under s 81? Section 4 attaches separate charging rules to those events. The full principal Act would be needed to confirm how a proposed transaction fits those provisions and what application or registration steps apply.

For a transfer, identify the title category under s 4(1), the consideration for the transfer, and the value of the title. Section 4(2) uses the greater of those values and then applies the prescribed minimum if the percentage fee is lower. Check whether s 4(3) may apply because an earlier approval fee was paid for an instrument or dealing that the transfer implements. Separately assess the conditions in s 4(4) if the parties are related bodies corporate and seek the prescribed-amount treatment.

For a dealing, identify the consideration and, if approval relates to multiple titles, the number of titles used in the statutory allocation under s 4(5)(a). Consider whether the alternative interest-value rule in s 4(5)(b) is engaged, including its cross-reference to s 81(1)(a), (b) or (d). Account for the minimum rules in s 4(6), the related-body-corporate conditions in s 4(7), and any qualifying exploration-work deduction under s 4(8).

The necessary supporting records may include the transaction instrument, valuation material, evidence of any earlier fee payment, corporate relationship and reorganisation purpose material, and information about qualifying exploration works. The text does not prescribe this as a formal evidence list. The relevant prescribed amount, regulations, principal Act provisions and commencement rules should be checked against the transaction date. A qualified Australian lawyer can assess how those sources apply to particular facts. This is general legal information, not legal advice. Zoe can make mistakes, and before acting on or relying on this analysis, have a qualified Australian lawyer check it.