Croft on behalf of the Barngarla Native Title Claim Group v State of South Australia (Port Augusta Proceeding)

In the matter of Croft on behalf of the Barngarla Native Title Claim Group v State of South Australia (Port Augusta Proceeding), the court was tasked with determining applications by Andrew Alfred Starkey to be joined as a respondent in two native title proceedings under section 84(5) of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth). Mr Starkey, a former member of a claim group in a previous native title determination application concerning the same area, sought to intervene in the proceedings to protect what he claimed were his interests that may be affected by the determinations of native title made in favour of other Aboriginal groups. The central legal issues before the court were whether Mr Starkey's assertion of native title rights and interests constituted an abuse of process, and whether it was in the interests of justice to allow him to join the proceedings.

The court found that Mr Starkey's interests, though not directly derived from native title, were indeed cultural and heritage interests that could be affected by the proceedings. In the first proceeding, where an application for a determination of native title in exclusive terms was included, the court considered that such a determination could demonstrably affect Mr Starkey's interests. Conversely, in the second proceeding, which included no application for a determination of exclusive native title, the court did not find that Mr Starkey's asserted interest could be affected by the non-exclusive determination. Consequently, the application for joinder was allowed in the first proceeding but disallowed in the second.

In summary, the court allowed Mr Starkey to be joined as a respondent in the first proceeding where exclusive native title was at issue, finding it necessary to hear all relevant evidence to protect his cultural and heritage interests. However, the court declined to join him in the second proceeding, where the potential impact on his interests was deemed less significant.