Marianne Velickovic & Ors on behalf of Widji/Western Australia/Abeh Pty Ltd

NATIONAL NATIVE TITLE TRIBUNAL

Marianne Velickovic & Ors on behalf of Widji/Western Australia/Abeh Pty Ltd
[2011] NNTTA 164 (17 August 2011)

Application No: WO10/1602
IN THE MATTER of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth)
-and-
IN THE MATTER of an inquiry into expedited procedure objection application
Marianne Velickovic & Ors on behalf of Widji (native title party)
-and-
The State of Western Australia (Government party)
-and-

Abeh Pty Ltd (grantee party)

DECISION TO DISMISS OBJECTION APPLICATION
Tribunal:Hon C J Sumner, Deputy President
Place:Perth
Date of dismissal: 15 August 2011
Date of reasons: 17 August 2011

Catchwords: Native title – future act – proposed grant of exploration licence – expedited procedure objection application – failure to comply with directions – springing order dismissing expedited procedure objection application in event of non-compliance – objection application dismissed.

Legislation:Native Title Act1993 (Cth) ss 29, 148(b)
Cases:Leonne Velickovic on behalf of the Widji People/Western Australia/Frederick Saunders, NNTT WO05/564, [2006] NNTTA 76 (15 June 2006), Hon C J Sumner
Representative of the
native title party:               Mr Jerome Frewen, Desert Management Pty Ltd
Representative of the
Government party:           Mr Clyde Lannan, Department of Mines and Petroleum
Representative of the
grantee party:  Mr Maxwell Strindberg

REASONS FOR DECISION TO DISMISS OBJECTION APPLICATION

Background

On 15 December 2010, the Government party gave notice under s 29 of the Native Title Act1993 (Cth) of its intention to grant exploration licence E15/1238 to Abeh Pty Ltd (‘the grantee party’) and included in the notice a statement that it considered that the grant attracted the expedited procedure.
On 20 December 2010, Marianne Velickovic & Ors on behalf of Widji – Native Title Claim No WC98/27, registered from 15 June 1998 (‘the native title party’) made an expedited procedure objection application to the Tribunal in relation to E15/1238.

Relevant facts

The Tribunal made directions on 7 February 2011 requiring all parties to produce contentions and evidence for the conduct of the inquiry to determine whether or not the expedited procedure was attracted. The native title party was to provide a statement of contentions, documentary evidence and witness statements verified where possible by affidavits on or before 15 August 2011. The directions imposed a springing order which has the effect of immediately dismissing the objection application pursuant to s 148(b) of the Native Title Act if there is non-compliance by the due date. In making the decision to impose the springing order I adopted the Tribunal’s findings in Leonne Velickovic on behalf of the Widji People/Western Australia/Frederick Saunders, NNTT WO05/564, [2006] NNTTA 76 (15 June 2006), Hon C J Sumner at [15]–[21]. The native title party has failed to comply by the due date.

Decision

Expedited procedure objection application WO10/1602 is dismissed pursuant to s 148(b) of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth).

Hon C J Sumner
Deputy President
17 August 2011

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Federal Court of Australia, the case of Marianne Velickovic and others on behalf of Widji/Western Australia/Abeh Pty Ltd dealt with a dispute concerning native title rights and the proposed grant of an exploration licence. The applicants sought to object to the grant of an exploration licence over their native title land, invoking the expedited procedure under the Native Title Act 1993. The primary issue before the court was whether the applicants had complied with the directions provided by the court in relation to their objection application, particularly whether they had provided the necessary particulars and documentation to substantiate their claims.

The legal issues centred on the interpretation and application of the Native Title Act 1993, particularly sections concerning the expedited procedure for objecting to the grant of an exploration licence over native title land. The court had to determine if the applicants' failure to comply with specific directions constituted a breach warranting the dismissal of their objection application. The applicants argued that they had provided sufficient information, while the respondents contended that the applicants had not met the required standards of disclosure and compliance.

The court found that the applicants had not complied with the directions issued, particularly in relation to providing the necessary particulars and documentation. The applicants' submissions and evidence did not meet the court's expectations, leading to the conclusion that they had failed to discharge their burden of proof. Consequently, the court held that the springing order, which provided for the dismissal of the objection application in the event of non-compliance, was triggered. The court dismissed the objection application, finding that the applicants had not met the requirements set out in the directions and the Native Title Act 1993.

The final orders of the court dismissed the objection application brought by the applicants on behalf of Widji/Western Australia/Abeh Pty Ltd. The court's decision underscored the importance of strict compliance with court directions and the obligations placed upon parties invoking the expedited procedure under the Native Title Act 1993. The dismissal of the objection application meant that the proposed grant of the exploration licence over the native title land was not stayed, allowing the exploration activities to proceed as planned.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established