Dempsey on behalf of the Bularnu, Waluwarra and Wangkayujuru People v State of Queensland (No 2)
Case
•
[2014] FCA 528
•23 May 2014
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Dempsey on behalf of the Bularnu, Waluwarra and Wangkayujuru People v State of Queensland (No 2) [2014] FCA 528
[2014] FCA 528
23 May 2014
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In Dempsey on behalf of the Bularnu, Waluwarra and Wangkayujuru People v State of Queensland (No 2), the applicants sought a determination of native title rights over their country. The claim group comprises the Bularnu, Waluwarra, and Wangkayujuru people, who together assert they form one society. The dispute centred on whether the applicants were entitled to a native title determination in the form they sought, with respondents raising objections regarding the composition of the applicant group and the identity of apical ancestors.
The court was required to determine whether the Bularnu, Waluwarra, and Wangkayujuru people constituted a single society for the purposes of the claim, and if the form of determination sought by the applicants was appropriate. The court also needed to assess whether additional apical ancestors should be included in the determination. The respondents argued that the Wangkayujuru people were not part of the same society as the Bularnu and Waluwarra and proposed an additional apical ancestor for inclusion.
The court concluded that there was substantial agreement among the respondents that the form of determination sought by the applicants was appropriate. The evidence established that the Bularnu, Waluwarra, and Wangkayujuru people form one society. The court found insufficient evidence to support the inclusion of an additional apical ancestor, and thus, the applicants were entitled to a determination in the form they sought.
The court was required to determine whether the Bularnu, Waluwarra, and Wangkayujuru people constituted a single society for the purposes of the claim, and if the form of determination sought by the applicants was appropriate. The court also needed to assess whether additional apical ancestors should be included in the determination. The respondents argued that the Wangkayujuru people were not part of the same society as the Bularnu and Waluwarra and proposed an additional apical ancestor for inclusion.
The court concluded that there was substantial agreement among the respondents that the form of determination sought by the applicants was appropriate. The evidence established that the Bularnu, Waluwarra, and Wangkayujuru people form one society. The court found insufficient evidence to support the inclusion of an additional apical ancestor, and thus, the applicants were entitled to a determination in the form they sought.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Indigenous Peoples & Native Title Law
Legal Concepts
-
Native Title
-
Constitutional Validity
-
Separation of Powers
-
Adverse Possession
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Briggs on behalf of the Boonwurrung People v State of Victoria (No 2) [2025] FCA 279
Cases Citing This Decision
72
Gumana v Northern Territory of Australia (No 2)
[2007] FCAFC 168
Gumana v Northern Territory of Australia (No 2)
[2007] FCAFC 168
Gumana v Northern Territory of Australia (No 2)
[2007] FCAFC 168
Cases Cited
41
Statutory Material Cited
7
Dempsey on behalf of the Bularnu, Waluwarra and Wangkayujuru People v State of Queensland
[2014] FCA 140
Western Australia v Ward
[2002] HCA 28
Akiba v Commonwealth
[2013] HCA 33