Dariwul People v Minister for Land and Water Conservation for the

[2000] FCA 905

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Dariwul People v Minister for Land & Water Conservation for the
State of New South Wales [2000] FCA 905

DARIWUL PEOPLE – GORDON MITCHELL WELLINGTON v MINISTER FOR LAND & WATER CONSERVATION FOR THE STATE OF NEW SOUTH WALES

NG 6101 of 1998

GYLES J
SYDNEY
23 JUNE 2000

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NG 6101 OF 1998

BETWEEN:	DARIWUL PEOPLE - GORDON MITCHELL WELLINGTON APPLICANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FOR THE STATE OF NEW SOUTH WALES RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	GYLES J
DATE OF ORDER:	23 JUNE 2000
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.   The proceedings are dismissed in accordance with O 20 r 2 of the Federal Court Rules.

2.   No order as to costs.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NG 6101 OF 1998

BETWEEN:	DARIWUL PEOPLE - GORDON MITCHELL WELLINGTON APPLICANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FOR THE STATE OF NEW SOUTH WALES RESPONDENT

JUDGE:	GYLES J
DATE:	23 JUNE 2000
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. In the previous matter  (NG6025 of 1998) I gave short reasons why it seemed to me to be appropriate to exercise the power to summarily dismiss that claim.  I repeat what I said there.  As the transcript here will record, there are defects in the application itself which may well have been in any event incurable, which underline the desirability of clearing the slate, as it were to enable the concentration by this claimant group upon submitting a claim which accords with the statute which can then be progressed expeditiously once prepared and propounded.

2. So, under the circumstances, I dismiss the proceedings.  I make no order as to costs.  The dismissal is under O 20 r 2, and it not being a dismissal on the merits, it will not be a barrier to any further application.  It is on that footing that I accede to the application.

I certify that the preceding two (2) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Gyles.

Associate:

Dated:             3 July 2000

Counsel for the Applicant:	A McLean
Counsel for the First Respondent:	Crown Solicitor
Counsel for the Second Respondent:	SB Philips
Counsel for the Third Respondent:	S Pritchard
Date of Hearing:	23 June 2000
Date of Judgment:	23 June 2000