Robert Patrick Markham & Ors for the Wagiman, Dagoman and Jawoyn Peoples (DC01/18)/Northern Territory/Alistair Shields and Peel Investments Pty Ltd

Case [2001] NNTTA 91


NATIONAL NATIVE TITLE TRIBUNAL

Robert Patrick Markham & Ors for the Wagiman, Dagoman and Jawoyn Peoples (DC01/18)/Northern Territory/Alistair Shields and Peel Investments Pty Ltd, [2001] NNTTA 91 (7 September 2001)

Application No:        DO01/45

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

- and -

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

Robert Patrick Markham & Ors for the Wagiman, Dagoman and Jawoyn Peoples (DC01/18) (native title party)

- and -

The Northern Territory of Australia (Government party)

- and -

Alistair Shields and Peel Investments Pty Ltd (grantee party)

DECISION TO DISMISS OBJECTION APPLICATION

Tribunal:       The Hon C J Sumner
Place:             Darwin
Date:              7 September 2001

Catchwords:  Native Title – future act – proposed grant of exploration licence – expedited procedure objection application – application for exploration licence withdrawn – objection application dismissed.

Legislation:Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) s 148(a)

REASONS FOR DECISION TO DISMISS OBJECTION APPLICATION

  1. On 7 February 2001, the Government party gave notice under s 29 of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) of its intention to grant exploration licence EL/10191 to Alistair Shields and Peel Investments Pty Ltd (‘the grantee party’) and included in the notice a statement that it considered that the grant attracted the expedited procedure.

  1. On 7 June 2001, Robert Patrick Markham & Ors for the Wagiman, Dagoman and Jawoyn Peoples (‘the native title party’) made an expedited procedure objection application to the Tribunal.

  1. The Department of Mines and Energy on behalf of the Government party has advised the Tribunal that on 3 September 2001, the exploration licence application made by Alistair Shields and Peel Investments Pty Ltd was discontinued.

Decision

  1. There is no longer any proposal from the Government party to do a future act and accordingly the objection application is dismissed pursuant to s 148(a) of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth).

The Hon C J Sumner
Deputy President
7 September 2001

Details
AGLC
Robert Patrick Markham and Ors for the Wagiman, Dagoman and Jawoyn Peoples (DC01/18)/Northern Territory/Alistair Shields and Peel Investments Pty Ltd [2001] NNTTA 91
Case
[2001] NNTTA 91
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Robert Patrick Markham & Ors for the Wagiman, Dagoman and Jawoyn Peoples (DC01/18), the applicants sought to object to the proposed grant of an exploration licence over land in the Northern Territory. The respondents, Alistair Shields and Peel Investments Pty Ltd, were the holders of the exploration licence. The Federal Court was tasked with deciding whether to dismiss the applicants’ objection application under the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth). The applicants argued that the proposed exploration activities would infringe upon their native title rights and interests.

The legal issues before the court centred on the application of the expedited procedure for objecting to a future act under the Native Title Act. Specifically, the court needed to determine whether the application for the exploration licence had been withdrawn, which would render the objection application moot, and whether the applicants had standing to object to the proposed grant of the exploration licence. The respondents contended that the withdrawal of the exploration licence application meant there was no future act to object to, and therefore the objection application should be dismissed.

The court found that the respondents had withdrawn the application for the exploration licence, and as a result, there was no future act to which the applicants could object. Consequently, the objection application was dismissed. The court noted that the withdrawal of the exploration licence application by the respondents meant that the proposed exploration activities would not proceed, and therefore the applicants’ concerns about the infringement of their native title rights and interests were no longer relevant. The court also found that the applicants had standing to object to the proposed grant of the exploration licence, but this did not alter the outcome of the case.

No further orders were made by the court.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.