Bradley Foster & Ors (Waanyi People); Alfie Johnny & Ors (Gangalidda and Garawa People #2)/Queensland/T J Burt, J A Galway & R W Kirkby

The case involved native title claimants, Bradley Foster and others representing the Waanyi people, and Alfie Johnny and others representing the Gangalidda and Garawa people. The claimants sought to challenge the proposed grant of exploration permits in Queensland, which they argued would infringe upon their native title rights. The matter was heard in the Federal Court, where the legal issues centred around the scope of native title rights and the applicability of section 29 of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth). This section allows the government to authorise future acts that may affect native title rights if it is in the national interest.

The court had to determine whether the proposed exploration permits would constitute future acts that might affect native title, and if so, whether the government could rely on section 29 to authorise these acts. The claimants argued that the exploration permits would significantly impact their native title rights, and thus, any authorisation under section 29 should not proceed without their consent. The government, initially asserting that section 29 applied, later withdrew this assertion during the proceedings. The court also had to consider an objection application brought by the claimants against the government's proposed authorisation of the exploration permits.

The court found that while the proposed exploration permits might affect the claimants' native title rights, the government had not made out a case that authorised the acts under section 29. The claimants' objection application was dismissed as the government had withdrawn its reliance on section 29. Consequently, the court ruled that the claimants' native title rights had not been extinguished or impaired by the proposed exploration permits. The court concluded that the government's action in withdrawing the section 29 assertion effectively nullified the need to proceed with the authorisation of the exploration permits without the claimants' consent. The claimants' rights remained protected, and the court's decision reinforced the importance of engaging with native title holders when considering future acts that may impact their rights.