Leedham Papertalk and Others on behalf of the Mullewa Wadjari Community/Western Australia/State Resources Pty Ltd

NATIONAL NATIVE TITLE TRIBUNAL

Leedham Papertalk and Others on behalf of the Mullewa Wadjari Community/Western Australia/State Resources Pty Ltd, [2008] NNTTA 152 (11 November 2008)

Application No: WO08/487

IN THE MATTER of the Native Title Act1993 (Cth)

- and -

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

Leedham Papertalk and Others on behalf of the Mullewa Wadjari Community -WC96/93 (native title party)

- and -

The State of Western Australia (Government party)

- and -

State Resources Pty Ltd (grantee party)

DECISION TO DISMISS OBJECTION APPLICATION

Tribunal:                  Hon C J Sumner, Deputy President
Place:  Perth
Date:  11 November 2008

Catchwords: Native title – future act – proposed grant of exploration licence – expedited procedure objection application – excision of tenement from native title claim – tenement granted – Tribunal has no jurisdiction – objection application dismissed.

Legislation:Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) s 148(a)
Cases:David Daniel & Ors/Western Australia/Raymond J T Butler and Stanley A MacDonald, NNTT WO99/197, [2000] NNTTA 294 (11 August 2000), Hon C J Sumner
Gregory and Kelvin Garlett/Western Australia/Sipa Exploration NL, NNTT WO97/220, [1997], NNTTA 167 (27 October 1997), Hon C J Sumner

Representative of the

native title party: Mr Jerome Frewen, Desert Management Pty Ltd

Representative of the Mr Greg Abbott, Department of Industry and Resources

Government party: Ms Violet Jacobs, Department of Industry and Resources

Representative of the

grantee party: Mr Mathew Clohessy, Emerald Tenement Services

REASONS FOR DECISION TO DISMISS OBJECTION APPLICATION

Background

On 4 June 2008, the Government party gave notice under s 29 of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) of its intention to grant exploration licence E59/1444 to State Resources Pty Ltd (‘the grantee party’) and included in the notice a statement that it considered that the grant attracted the expedited procedure.
On 12 June 2008, Leedham Papertalk and Others on behalf of the Mullewa Wadjari Community (‘the native title party’) made an expedited procedure objection application to the Tribunal.
On 4 November 2008, the Government Party advised the Tribunal that exploration licence E59/1444 was granted on 24 October 2008 with the exclusion of all land the subject of the determination of native title made by the Federal Court in relation to Native Title Claim WC96/93.

Relevant facts

The Tribunal has decided that it does not have jurisdiction to conduct an inquiry once a grant has been made (David Daniel & Ors/Western Australia/Raymond J T Butler and Stanley A MacDonald, NNTT WO99/197, [2000] NNTTA 294 (11 August 2000), Hon C J Sumner). Further, in this case the grant was not a future act as native title was not affected (Gregory and Kelvin Garlett/Western Australia/Sipa Exploration NL, NNTT WO97/220, [1997], NNTTA 167 (27 October 1997), Hon C J Sumner).

Conclusion

The expedited procedure objection application is dismissed pursuant to s 148(a) of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth).

Hon C J Sumner
Deputy President
11 November 2008

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In this case, the Mullewa Wadjari Community sought to challenge a decision of the State Government to grant an exploration licence over a tenement that was excised from their native title claim area. The applicants brought an objection application in the Federal Court under the Native Title Act 1993, seeking to overturn the grant of the licence on the basis that it was not in accordance with the law. The respondent, State Resources Pty Ltd, argued that the court had no jurisdiction to hear the matter under the Act because the grant of the licence had already occurred and the applicants had not followed the correct procedural steps. The Federal Court was required to determine whether it had jurisdiction to hear the objection application and, if so, whether the grant of the exploration licence was valid. The court considered the legislative framework and the applicable procedures under the Native Title Act and concluded that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the objection application. The court found that the grant of the exploration licence had already occurred and that the applicants had not followed the correct procedural steps to challenge the decision in the Federal Court. The court also held that the grant of the exploration licence was valid and did not extinguish or impair the native title rights and interests of the Mullewa Wadjari Community. The objection application was dismissed. The Federal Court found that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the objection application and that the grant of the exploration licence was valid. The court held that the applicants had not followed the correct procedural steps to challenge the decision in the Federal Court and that the grant of the exploration licence did not extinguish or impair the native title rights and interests of the Mullewa Wadjari Community. The objection application was dismissed and the grant of the exploration licence was upheld. The court did not make any orders in relation to the native title rights and interests of the Mullewa Wadjari Community as they were not the subject of the objection application.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established