The 1999 edition of the Australasian Code for Reporting of Identified Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves (the JORC Code') became effective in September 1999 and is the latest revision of a Code which was originally issued in 1989, but which has an ancestry dating back to the first JORC report released in 1972. The modifications introduced in 1999, which are briefly discussed in this paper, substantially improved the document, but did not materially alter the fundamentals of the Code, these being the Mineral Resource/Ore Reserve classification framework and terminology, and the requirements and guidelines for public reporting of Resources and Reserves. Codes or guides similar to the JORC Code exist or are under development in other countries, including the United States of America, Canada, the United Kingdom and South Africa. It is pleasing to note that the 1999 JORC Code has been used as a model by these countries in developing their latest standards, and has been a major influence in the formulating of international reporting standards. The JORC Code is primarily a document covering the reporting of the results of mining companies' activities to the public. However, mining geologists are interested in practical assistance and guidance in carrying out their duties. The JORC Code provides this in four ways. It establishes a framework within which those preparing and publicly reporting Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimates must operate, by setting standards for the classification and reporting of Resources and Reserves and for qualifications of Competent Persons. It establishes the division of responsibility between the company's Board of Directors and Competent Persons with respect to the preparation and reporting of Resources and Reserves, and empowers Competent Persons to materially influence how their Resource/Reserve estimates are reported to the public. It provides an extensive, detailed and practical check list of criteria to be taken into account in the preparation of Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimates. Finally, it provides a strong measure of due diligence protection in the event of litigation if it is followed with diligence and honesty.