Dora Sharpe & Ors on behalf of Gooniyandi Combined #2/Western Australia/Kinloch Resources Pty Ltd
[2011] NNTTA 92
•27 May 2011
NATIONAL NATIVE TITLE TRIBUNAL
Dora Sharpe & Ors on behalf of Gooniyandi Combined #2/Western Australia/Kinloch Resources Pty Ltd, [2011] NNTTA 92 (27 May 2011)
Application No: WO10/753
IN THE MATTER of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth)
-and-
IN THE MATTER of an inquiry into an expedited procedure objection application
Dora Sharpe & Ors on behalf of Gooniyandi Combined #2 – WC00/10 (native title party)
-and-
The State of Western Australia (Government party)
-and-
Kinloch Resources Pty Ltd (grantee party)
DECISION TO DISMISS OBJECTION APPLICATION
Tribunal: Hon C J Sumner, Deputy President
Place: Perth
Date of dismissal: 25 May 2011
Date of reasons: 27 May 2011
Catchwords: Native title – future act – proposed grant of exploration licence – expedited procedure objection application – failure to comply with directions – springing order dismissing expedited procedure objection application in the event of non-compliance – objection application dismissed.
Legislation:Native Title Act1993 (Cth) ss 29, 148(b)
Cases:Dixon v Northern Territory of Australia [2002] NNTTA 48; (2002) 169 FLR 103
Representative of the
native title party: Ms Ania Maszkowski, Kimberley Land Council
Representative of the
Government party: Mr Dennis Jacobs, Department of Mines and Petroleum
Representative of the
grantee party: Mr Mark Mitchell, Kinloch Resources Pty Ltd
REASONS FOR DECISION TO DISMISS OBJECTION APPLICATION
Background
On 10 February 2010, the Government party gave notice under s 29 of the Native Title Act1993 (Cth) of its intention to grant exploration licence E80/4322 to Kinloch Resources Pty Ltd (‘the grantee party’ and included in the notice a statement that it considered that the grant attracted the expedited procedure.
On 8 June 2010, Dora Sharpe & Ors on behalf of Gooniyandi Combined # 2– Native Title Claim No WC00/10, registered from 23 April 2001 (‘the native title party’) made an expedited procedure objection application to the Tribunal.
Relevant facts
The Tribunal made directions on 22 June 2010, requiring all parties to produce contentions and evidence for the conduct of the inquiry to determine whether or not the expedited procedure was attracted. The directions contain a statement that an objection may be dismissed pursuant to s 148(b) of the Act if the objector fails within a reasonable time to proceed with the application or to comply with a direction of the Tribunal.
During a number of conferences held between July 2010 and March 2011 parties advised they were negotiating the terms of a Heritage Protection Agreement (‘HPA’). Directions were amended a number of times to allow negotiations to continue.
A listing hearing was convened on 12 May 2011 at which the native title party requested a four week extension to compliance dates to ascertain if evidence was to be collected and submitted in relation to this matter. The State and grantee party supported the extension and requested a springing order be placed on the native title party compliance date due to the age of the matter. I approved the extension and imposition of a springing order on 16 May 2011. The springing order imposed on the native title party has the effect of immediately dismissing the objection application pursuant to s 148(b) of the Act if there is non-compliance by the native title party by the due date, being 25 May 2011 (see Dixon v Northern Territory of Australia [2002] NNTTA 48; (2002) 169 FLR 103).
The Government party has complied with directions. Neither contentions nor evidence has been received from the native title party and no explanation has been offered for the failure to comply with the Tribunal’s directions. The springing order, applied to the Tribunal directions on 16 May 2011, has resulted in dismissal of the application.
Decision
Expedited procedure objection application WO10/753 is dismissed pursuant to s 148(b) of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth).
Hon C J Sumner
Deputy President
27 May 2011
0
1
0