Dja Dja Wurrung People/Victoria/Highlake Resources Pty Ltd
Case
•
[2008] NNTTA 67
•29 May 2008
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Dja Dja Wurrung People/Victoria/Highlake Resources Pty Ltd [2008] NNTTA 67
[2008] NNTTA 67
29 May 2008
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The case involved the Dja Dja Wurrung People, the Government of Victoria, and Highlake Resources Pty Ltd. The dispute centred around the granting of exploration licences under the Mineral Resources (Sustainable Development) Act 1990 (Vic). The High Court was asked to determine whether the proposed exploration licences could proceed in light of native title claims.
The central legal issue was whether the grant of the exploration licences constituted a future act that could be authorised under section 223 of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth). The court had to consider if the government had provided the required notice under section 29 of the Act, if negotiations had been conducted in good faith, and if the Tribunal had jurisdiction to make a determination given the consent of all parties involved.
The court found that all parties had complied with the necessary legislative requirements, including the provision of a section 29 notice and the conduct of negotiations in good faith. The Tribunal noted that the native title parties had consented to the determination that the proposed acts could proceed. This consent was evidenced by a minute of consent orders signed by representatives of all parties, affirming compliance with sections 31(1)(a) and 31(1)(b) of the Native Title Act 1993. The court accepted this consent as sufficient basis for its determination.
The court concluded that the grant of the exploration licences to Highlake Resources Pty Ltd could proceed, as all parties had consented to the determination. This resolution was in line with the terms of the consent orders, and the court's determination was made accordingly.
The central legal issue was whether the grant of the exploration licences constituted a future act that could be authorised under section 223 of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth). The court had to consider if the government had provided the required notice under section 29 of the Act, if negotiations had been conducted in good faith, and if the Tribunal had jurisdiction to make a determination given the consent of all parties involved.
The court found that all parties had complied with the necessary legislative requirements, including the provision of a section 29 notice and the conduct of negotiations in good faith. The Tribunal noted that the native title parties had consented to the determination that the proposed acts could proceed. This consent was evidenced by a minute of consent orders signed by representatives of all parties, affirming compliance with sections 31(1)(a) and 31(1)(b) of the Native Title Act 1993. The court accepted this consent as sufficient basis for its determination.
The court concluded that the grant of the exploration licences to Highlake Resources Pty Ltd could proceed, as all parties had consented to the determination. This resolution was in line with the terms of the consent orders, and the court's determination was made accordingly.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Indigenous Peoples & Native Title Law
Legal Concepts
-
Native Title
-
Consent Determination
-
Future Act
-
Jurisdiction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Robert Mumu and Others on behalf of Karinga Lakes v Territory Potash Pty Ltd [2020] NNTTA 66
Cases Citing This Decision
6
Mullewa Wadjari Community/Western Australia/Drew Griffin Money
[2012] NNTTA 26
Cases Cited
6
Statutory Material Cited
0
Little v Western Australia
[2001] FCA 1706
Wilma Freddie/Western Australia/Stephen Grant Povey
[2001] NNTTA 162
Hazeldell Ltd v Commonwealth
[1924] HCA 36