Brooks on behalf of the Mamu People v State of Queensland (No 3)

The case involves an application by Stephen Brooks, Alfred Joyce, Victor Maund and Dean Purcell on behalf of the Mamu People for a determination of Native Title under the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth). The respondents include the State of Queensland, local councils, Ergon Energy Corporation Limited and individuals involved in the fishing industry. The Mamu People have been seeking recognition of their Native Title rights over an area centred on the watersheds of the North and South Johnstone Rivers. The State initially consented to the proposed determination but later withdrew its consent, seeking an adjournment to investigate the Wanyurr Majay People's potential claim over part of the Mamu claim area. The court was required to decide whether the State could withdraw its consent to the proposed consent determination under s 87A of the Native Title Act. The court also had to consider the merits of the Mamu People's claim in light of the Wanyurr Majay People's potential competing claim.

Justice Dowsett held that the State was bound by its agreement to the proposed determination and could not withdraw its consent without the leave of the court. The court emphasized that the State's decision to consent was final, and any attempt to withdraw consent would be subject to the court's discretion. The court also held that the Mamu People had a strong claim to the whole of the claimed area, and the Wanyurr Majay People had not demonstrated a clear or imminent claim to any part of it. The court decided to proceed with the consent determination, emphasizing the importance of finality in Native Title determinations and the rights of the Mamu People to a timely resolution of their claim.

The court made a consent determination in favour of the Mamu People, recognizing their Native Title rights over the claimed area, subject to such amendments as the parties had agreed. The court also certified that the reasons for judgment were a true copy.