High Court dismisses Rinehart's bid for Rhodes Ridge stake
The order also honoured an agreement between Mrs Rinehart's father, Lang Hancock, and his business partner, Peter Wright, in 1984, that involved the carve-up of their various mining assets.
An appeal by Hancock was dismissed last October but the company contested certain court orders. In February, the appeal against the orders was dismissed.
On Thursday, the full bench of the High Court refused Hancock's application for special leave to appeal. The company will also have to pay court costs.
Wright Prospecting issued a brief statement saying it welcomed the ruling.
"Throughout this matter and the previous matters in the Supreme Court of Western Australia and the Court of Appeal, Wright Prospecting's focus has been to enforce and protect its rights to 50 per cent of the Rhodes Ridge joint venture," it said.
"The company is pleased that today's ruling upholds those rights and the original judgment."
Rio Tinto owns the other half of Rhodes Ridge, situated east of its West Angelas operations and south of its Hope Downs joint venture with Hancock.
Rhodes Ridge has been the subject of legal battles before the Hancock and Wright stoush. Junior explorer Cazaly Resources began its valiant attempt to wrest control of the project from the three mining heavyweights in 2007.
Cazaly said the joint venture had "warehoused" the project for decades instead of developing it. In 2010, the Supreme Court of WA said Cazaly had a case but the company has not pushed ahead with its challenge.
Hancock and Wright remain embroiled in a separate court dispute over three of the six Hope Downs iron ore tenements. Wright seeks half of Hancock's 50 per cent stake, considering Hope Downs was jointly discovered by Lang Hancock and Peter Wright.
Frequently Asked Questions about this Article…
The full bench of the High Court refused Hancock Prospecting's application for special leave to appeal, effectively ending Gina Rinehart's final bid to reclaim a Rhodes Ridge stake. The decision means earlier court orders stand and Hancock must also pay court costs.
Wright Prospecting holds 50% of the Rhodes Ridge joint venture and Rio Tinto owns the other 50%. A 2010 court order forced Hancock Prospecting to relinquish a 25% stake, increasing Wright's interest to 50%, and the High Court ruling upholds that outcome.
The 2010 court order honoured an agreement from 1984 between Lang Hancock and Peter Wright that governed the carve-up of their mining assets. That order required Hancock to relinquish its 25% stake in Rhodes Ridge, boosting Wright's share to 50%.
Wright Prospecting issued a brief statement welcoming the ruling, saying it was focused on enforcing and protecting its rights to 50% of the Rhodes Ridge joint venture and was pleased the original judgment was upheld.
Rio Tinto owns the other half of the Rhodes Ridge joint venture. The project sits east of Rio Tinto's West Angelas operations and south of the Hope Downs joint venture that Rio Tinto operates with Hancock.
Cazaly Resources attempted to gain control of Rhodes Ridge starting in 2007 and accused the joint venture of 'warehousing' the project instead of developing it. In 2010, the Supreme Court of Western Australia said Cazaly had a case, but the company did not pursue the challenge further.
Yes. Hancock and Wright remain involved in a separate court dispute over three of the six Hope Downs iron ore tenements. Wright is seeking half of Hancock's 50% stake in Hope Downs, arguing the discovery was jointly made by Lang Hancock and Peter Wright.
The ruling provides legal clarity on ownership: it upholds Wright Prospecting's 50% rights in Rhodes Ridge and confirms Rio Tinto as the other 50% owner. For everyday investors, that clarity can be important when assessing who controls development decisions and long‑term plans for the asset, while Hancock Prospecting will also face the immediate consequence of paying court costs.
Call 1300 880 160
Start a chat
Schedule a call
