FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Button v Chapman on behalf of the Wakka Wakka People [2003] FCA 861
Statutes
Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) ss 61(2)(a) and (c) 62 and 66B
Federal Court Rules O 6, O 20 r 2(1)(c)
Cases
BUTTON V OSCAR CHAPMAN, ELLEN SHADFORD, CYRIL COUCHY, LILLIAN MIMI, DAVID BEEZLEY, MICHAEL BOND, PAM DUNCAN, MAVIS HAWKINS, PATRICIA BOND, BERYL GAMBRILL, PASTOR HENRY COLLINS, ROBERT LACY, REGGIE LITTLE, GEORGE BONE, SAM MURRAY JNR AND KEVIN DOOLON (‘WAKKA WAKKA PEOPLE #2’) AND
THE STATE OF QUEENSLAND AND OTHERSQ6032 of 1999
KIEFEL J
BRISBANE
20 AUGUST 2003
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY
Q6032 OF 1999
BETWEEN:
BURT BUTTON
APPLICANTAND:
OSCAR CHAPMAN, ELLEN SHADFORD, CYRIL COUCHY, LILLIAN MIMI, DAVID BEEZLEY, MICHAEL BOND, PAM DUNCAN, MAVIS HAWKINS, PATRICIA BOND, BERYL GAMBRILL, PASTOR HENRY COLLINS, ROBERT LACY, REGGIE LITTLE, GEORGE BONE, SAM MURRAY JNR AND KEVIN DOOLON (‘WAKKA WAKKA PEOPLE #2’)
AND
THE STATE OF QUEENSLAND AND OTHERS
RESPONDENTSJUDGE:
KIEFEL J
DATE OF ORDER:
20 AUGUST 2003
WHERE MADE:
BRISBANE
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The motion to strike out the application for native title determination is dismissed.
THE COURT DIRECTS THAT:2.The applicants other than Mr S J Murray Jnr, Mr G Bone and Mr R Little, confer within two (2) months as to:
(a)whether they intend to apply to the Court to remove those three persons as applicants; and
(b)whether they propose continuing with the application in its present form.
3.Any application to remove applicants is to be filed by 14 November 2003 and forthwith served upon the three applicants referred to in direction 2.
4.If no application is filed by that date, the application is to be listed for directions on 12 December 2003.
5.A copy of this order and the reasons be served on the three applicants, referred to in direction 2.
Note:Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY
Q6032 OF 1999
BETWEEN:
BURT BUTTON
APPLICANTAND:
OSCAR CHAPMAN, ELLEN SHADFORD, CYRIL COUCHY, LILLIAN MIMI, DAVID BEEZLEY, MICHAEL BOND, PAM DUNCAN, MAVIS HAWKINS, PATRICIA BOND, BERYL GAMBRILL, PASTOR HENRY COLLINS, ROBERT LACY, REGGIE LITTLE, GEORGE BONE, SAM MURRAY JNR AND KEVIN DOOLON (‘WAKKA WAKKA PEOPLE #2’)
AND
THE STATE OF QUEENSLAND AND OTHERS
RESPONDENTS
JUDGE:
KIEFEL J
DATE:
20 AUGUST 2003
PLACE:
BRISBANE
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
There are sixteen persons named as applicants in these proceedings, on behalf of the Wakka Wakka People. The anthropologist engaged by the Gurang Land Council, which formerly acted for the applicants, has identified some fifteen descent groups within the larger group. The affidavit material filed by the Gurang Land Council, which is relied upon by one of the applicants who responds to this motion, shows that meetings were convened before the application was brought. The affidavits relating to authorisation, as required by s 62 of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) were…
Continue reading Button v Chapman
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Button v Chapman [2003] FCA 861
- Case
- [2003] FCA 861
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues centred on the authority of the applicants to represent the native title claimants and the procedural requirements for making a native title determination. The court had to consider whether the applicants had the necessary authorisation from the native title claimants and if the application could proceed under the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth). Additionally, the court examined the implications of the respondents' contention that certain applicants lacked proper authorisation and the effect this had on the validity of the application.
In its decision, the court found that the motion to strike out the application was not successful, dismissing the respondents' contention. The court acknowledged that there were concerns about the authorisation of certain applicants but concluded that these issues did not warrant a complete dismissal of the application. The court directed that the remaining applicants confer within two months to determine whether they intended to proceed with the application and whether they would seek to remove the three named applicants. If no application to remove the applicants was filed by 14 November 2003, the court scheduled the matter for further directions on 12 December 2003. The court also ordered that the reasons for the decision and the orders be served on the three applicants in question.
The court's decision ensured that the application for native title determination could proceed, while also providing a clear pathway for addressing the concerns about the authorisation of the applicants. This allowed the matter to move forward in an orderly manner, with the remaining applicants having the opportunity to address the issues and decide their course of action.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The motion to strike out the application for native title determination is dismissed.
THE COURT DIRECTS THAT:
2. The applicants other than Mr S J Murray Jnr, Mr G Bone and Mr R Little, confer within two (2) months as to:
(a) whether they intend to apply to the Court to remove those three persons as applicants; and
(b) whether they propose continuing with the application in its present form.
3. Any application to remove applicants is to be filed by 14 November 2003 and forthwith served upon the three applicants referred to in direction 2.
4. If no application is filed by that date, the application is to be listed for directions on 12 December 2003.
5. A copy of this order and the reasons be served on the three applicants, referred to in direction 2.
Note:
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
Established by: KIEFEL J
Full text does not contain this section.