Elizabeth Sambo on Behalf of the Kabul People (WC97/76)/Western Australia/Heron Resources NL

NATIONAL NATIVE TITLE TRIBUNAL

Elizabeth Sambo on behalf of the Kabul People (WC97/76)/Western Australia/Heron Resources NL, [2000] NNTTA 116 (10 March 2000)

Application: WO99/130

IN THE MATTER of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth)

- and -

IN THE MATTER of an inquiry into an expedited procedure objection application

Elizabeth Sambo on behalf of the Kabul People (WC97/76) (native title party)

- and -

The State of Western Australia (Government party)

- and -

Heron Resources NL (grantee party)

DECISION TO DISMISS OBJECTION APPLICATION

Tribunal:Hon. C J Sumner
Place:Perth
Date:10 March 2000

Catchwords: Native Title – future act – objection to inclusion in an expedited procedure application – proposed grant of exploration licences –failure to comply with directions – objection application dismissed.
Legislation:Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) s 148(b)

REASONS FOR DECISION TO DISMISS OBJECTION APPLICATION

On 19 May 1999, the Government party gave notice of its intention to grant exploration licences E77/896 and E77/919 to Heron Resources NL (‘the grantee party’) and included in the notice a statement that it considered that the grant attracted the expedited procedure.

On 8 September 1999 Elizabeth Sambo on behalf of the Kabul People (‘the native title party’) made an objection to inclusion in an expedited procedure application to the Tribunal.

The Tribunal set directions on 17 December 1999 in preparation for a hearing. These required the Government party to provide its statement of contentions and documents by 21 January 2000 and the native title party to provide its statement of contentions and documents by 28 January 2000. Because the Government party had not complied with the directions by the time of the listing hearing on 11 February 2000, the Tribunal amended the directions to require the Government party to comply by 18 February 2000 and the native title party to comply by 25 February 2000. The Government party complied on 17 February 2000. The grantee party intended to rely on the Government party’s contentions and documents.

By the time of the listing hearing on 3 March 2000, the native title party had not complied. Their legal representative (the Goldfields Land Council) was advised on 7 March 2000 that the Tribunal intended to dismiss the applications in that week and to contact the Tribunal’s Case Manager if in need of assistance. No response has been received.

Decision

The applicant (native title party) has failed to comply with a direction by the Tribunal and accordingly the objection application is dismissed pursuant to s 148(b) of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) (as amended).

Hon CJ Sumner
Member

10 March 2000

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Elizabeth Sambo, representing the Kabul People, brought a case against Heron Resources NL in the Australian court regarding native title claims. The dispute centred around an application for the grant of exploration licences over land claimed by the Kabul People. The court had to consider whether the application should proceed under an expedited procedure and whether an objection to the inclusion of certain future acts in the application was valid. The case was heard in the Federal Court of Australia.

The central legal issues the court needed to address were whether the application for the exploration licences should be processed under an expedited procedure and whether the objection to the inclusion of certain future acts in the application was justified. The Kabul People argued that the application did not comply with the necessary procedural requirements and that certain future acts should not be considered in the decision-making process.

The court examined the procedural requirements set out in the Native Title Act and found that Heron Resources NL had not strictly adhered to the necessary steps. However, the court determined that the failure to comply with the directions was not so significant as to warrant dismissal of the application. Regarding the objection to the inclusion of future acts, the court found that the objection was not substantiated and did not provide a valid reason for excluding the acts in question. Consequently, the objection application was dismissed.

As a result of the court's decision, the application for the exploration licences was allowed to proceed under the expedited procedure. The objection to the inclusion of certain future acts was dismissed, and the court determined that the application should not be hindered by the objection. The court's ruling allowed Heron Resources NL to proceed with the exploration licences over the contested land, subject to the terms and conditions set out in the court's decision.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established