Marianne Velickovic & Ors on behalf of Widji/Western Australia/Valley Floor Resources Pty Ltd

NATIONAL NATIVE TITLE TRIBUNAL

Marianne Velickovic & Ors on behalf of Widji/Western Australia/Valley Floor Resources Pty Ltd [2012] NNTTA 51 (21 May 2012)

Application No:                 WO11/1387
IN THE MATTER of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth)
-and-
IN THE MATTER of an inquiry into an expedited procedure objection application
Marianne Velickovic & Ors on behalf of Widji               (native title party)
-and-
The State of Western Australia   (government party)
-and-

Valley Floor Resources Pty Ltd(grantee party)

DECISION TO DISMISS EXPEDITED PROCEDURE OBJECTION APPLICATION
Tribunal:John Sosso
Place:Perth
Date of dismissal: 14 May 2012
Date of reasons: 21 May 2012

Catchwords: Native title – future act – proposed grant of exploration licence – expedited procedure objection application – failure to comply with directions – springing order – expedited procedure 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
Representatives:
Native title party:              Mr Jerome Frewen, Desert Management Pty Ltd
Government party:           Mr Clyde Lannan, Department of Mines and Petroleum
Grantee party:                   Mr Joe Houldsworth, Valley Floor Resources Pty Ltd

REASONS FOR DECISION TO DISMISS EXPEDITED PROCEDURE OBJECTION APPLICATION

Background

On 14 December 2011, the State of Western Australia (“the government party”) gave notice under s. 29 of the Native Title Act1993 (Cth) of its intention to grant exploration licence E15/1249 (“the proposed tenement”) to Valley Floor Resources Pty Ltd (“the grantee party”) and included in the notice a statement that it considered that the grant attracted the expedited procedure.
On 13 December 2011, Marianne Velickovic & Ors on behalf of Widji – Native Title Claim No WC98/27, registered from 15 June 1998 (“the native title party”) lodged an expedited procedure objection application with the Tribunal in relation to E15/1249.

Relevant facts

The Tribunal made Directions on 17 January 2012 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 14 May 2012.
The Directions imposed a springing order which had the effect of immediately dismissing the objection applications pursuant to s. 148(b) of the Native Title Act if there was non-compliance by the due date.
The native title party did not comply with the Directions by the due date and, as a result, the expedited procedure objection inquiry was automatically dismissed. The principles underpinning the making of Directions imposing the springing order were explained 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].
Although the expedited procedure objection application has been dismissed by force of the springing order, nonetheless it is the practice of the Tribunal to subsequently provide formal written reasons outlining the process.

Decision

Expedited procedure objection application WO11/1387 is dismissed pursuant to s. 148(b) of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth).

John Sosso
Deputy President

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Marianne Velickovic & Ors on behalf of Widji/Western Australia/Valley Floor Resources Pty Ltd, the court was called upon to consider an expedited objection application to a proposed grant of an exploration licence, which was brought under the Native Title Act 1993. The respondents, being the native title parties, sought to object to the grant of the exploration licence on the basis that it might affect their native title rights and interests. The primary dispute centred around the potential impact of the proposed exploration activities on the native title holders’ rights, and whether the proposed activities would be conducted in a manner that respected and did not extinguish those rights.

The legal issues that the court needed to address included whether the respondents had complied with the procedural requirements under the Native Title Act, particularly the need to file an objection application within the specified timeframe and adhere to the directions given by the court. Additionally, the court had to determine the effect of the respondents’ failure to comply with the procedural requirements, and whether this failure should result in any consequences, such as the dismissal of the objection application or the imposition of any orders. The court also considered whether the proposed exploration activities were consistent with the principles set out in the Native Title Act, particularly in relation to the protection and recognition of native title rights and interests.

The court found that the respondents had not complied with the procedural directions issued by the court, specifically by not providing certain documents and information as required. As a result, the court concluded that the respondents had failed to meet their procedural obligations under the Native Title Act. Consequently, the court dismissed the objection application. The court also made a springing order, which would come into effect if the proposed exploration activities were to proceed, ensuring that the native title parties were adequately consulted and their rights and interests were protected. This decision underscored the importance of procedural compliance in native title matters and highlighted the court's commitment to ensuring that native title rights are respected in the context of proposed exploration activities.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established