Colin Hamlett & Ors on behalf of Wajarri Yamatji #1 v Ace Minerals Group Pty Ltd; Mark Selga; Rumble Resources Limited; Debnal Pty Ltd and Another

[2020] NNTTA 22

NATIONAL NATIVE TITLE TRIBUNAL

Colin Hamlett & Ors on behalf of Wajarri Yamatji #1 v Ace Minerals Group Pty Ltd; Mark Selga; Rumble Resources Limited; Debnal Pty Ltd and Another [2020] NNTTA 22 (28 February 2020)

Application No: WO2019/0806; WO2019/0807; WO2019/0693; WO2019/0760; WO2019/0871 

IN THE MATTER of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth)

- and -

IN THE MATTER of an inquiry into an expedited procedure objection  application

Colin Hamlett & Ors on behalf of Wajarri Yamatji #1 (WC2004/010)

(native title party)

- and -

Ace Minerals Group Pty Ltd; Mark Selga; Rumble Resources Limited; and Debnal Pty Ltd

(grantee parties)

- and -

State of Western Australia

(Government party)

DECISION TO DISMISS OBJECTION APPLICATIONS

Tribunal:	Member Nerida Cooley
Place:	Brisbane
Date:	28 February 2020

Catchwords:

Native title – future act – proposed grant of prospecting licences – proposed grant of exploration licences – expedited procedure objection application – failure to comply with directions – objection applications dismissed

Legislation:

Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) ss 29, 148

Cases:

Colin Hamlett & Ors on behalf of Wajarri Yamatji #1 v Peter Romeo Gianni and Another [2019] NNTTA 68 (Wajarri Yamatji v Gianni)

Michael Daniel Teelow/Michael Page/ Northern Territory v Page [2001] NNTT 107; 166 FLR 266 (Teelow v Page)

Representative of the native title party:

Mr Stephen Compton

Representatives of the grantee parties: Nick Bonwick (for WO2019/0806 and WO2019/0807);
Mark Selga (for WO2019/0693);
Taila Childs, Mining Access Legal (for WO2019/0760); and
Jacob Loveland, All Mining Legal (for WO2019/0871).

Representative of the Government party: Bethany Conway, Department of Mines, Industry Regulation and Safety

REASONS FOR DECISION

Background

1. This decision relates to the dismissal of a number of objection applications made by the registered native title claimant for the Wajarri Yamatji #1 native title determination application (WC2004/010) (native title party). The circumstances of each application are similar and therefore it is convenient to decide them together.

2. The objection applications concern the proposed grant of prospecting licences P51/3136 and P51/3137 and exploration licences E51/1924, E51/1927 and E51/1932 (licences).

3. In giving notice of its intention to grant the licences under s 29 of the Native Title Act1993 (Cth) (NTA), the State of Western Australia (State) included a statement that it considers the grant of the licences to be acts attracting the expedited procedure (expedited procedure statement). Details of the notification day for each licence, as well as the relevant grantee party, are set out in the Schedule to this decision. 

4. The native title party objects to the inclusion of the expedited procedure statement.  Yamatji Marlpa Aboriginal Corporation (YMAC) lodged the objections on behalf of the native title party, however, in each case, YMAC advised that Mr Stephen Compton was the relevant heritage service provider. Details of the objection applications, including the date of lodgement are also set out in the Schedule.

5. The President of the Tribunal directed me to constitute the Tribunal for the purposes of the inquiry in each of these matters and I made directions requiring all parties to provide contentions and evidence.  The information in the Schedule includes the date I made directions in each matter and the due date for provision of the native title party’s material.

6. In each case, the native title party failed to comply by the due date, and the Tribunal subsequently wrote to the parties to advise that the objection was at risk of dismissal.  Parties were invited to provide comments.  In each instance either the State or the grantee party, or both, responded to indicate support for dismissal due to the native title party’s non-compliance.  No response was received from the native title party in relation to any of the matters.

Consideration of Dismissal

1. The Tribunal has a broad discretion under s 148(b) of the NTA to dismiss an objection application at any stage of the inquiry in circumstances where the native title party fails within reasonable time to proceed with the application or to comply with a direction by the Tribunal.

2. In considering these dismissals, I have had regard to the principles set out in Teelow v Page (at [13]).  I have also taken account of the native title party’s persistent non-compliance with directions and failure to communicate with the Tribunal (as discussed in Wajarri Yamatji v Gianni and other matters since).

3. In all five cases before me, the native title party has not given any reason for its non-compliance with the directions of the Tribunal, nor sought any extension of time, despite having an opportunity to do so.

4. Having regard to all the facts and circumstances of these matters, I am satisfied that each of the objection applications should be dismissed.  Accordingly, it is not necessary for me to determine whether the grant of any of the licences is an act attracting the expedited procedure.

Decision

1. The expedited procedure objection applications in relation to prospecting licences P51/3136 and P51/3137, and exploration licences E51/1924, E51/1927 and E51/1932 are dismissed under s 148(b) of the NTA.

Ms Nerida Cooley
Member
28 February 2020

SCHEDULE

Tenement No.	Grantee Party	Notification Day (s 29 Notice)	Objection Application No.	Date Objection Application Lodged	Date Directions Made	Native Title Party Compliance Date
P51/3136	Ace Minerals Group Pty Ltd	31/07/2019	WO2019/0806	12/09/2019	13/09/2019	13/01/2020
P51/3137	Ace Minerals Group Pty Ltd	31/07/2019	WO2019/0807	12/09/2019	13/09/2019	13/01/2020
E51/1924	Mark Selga	14/08/2019	WO2019/0693	15/08/2019	23/08/2019	21/01/2020
E51/1927	Rumble Resources Limited	28/08/2019	WO2019/0760	30/08/2019	10/09/2019	23/01/2020
E51/1932	Debnal Pty Ltd	25/09/2019	WO2019/0871	27/09/2019	1/10/2019	17/02/2020