Elsa Derschow & Ors on behalf of the Palyku/Western Australia/Brockman Iron Pty Ltd

[2012] NNTTA 100

NATIONAL NATIVE TITLE TRIBUNAL

Elsa Derschow & Ors on behalf of the Palyku/Western Australia/Brockman Iron Pty Ltd, [2012] NNTTA 100 (12 September 2012)

Application No:  WO11/292, WO12/293, WO12/294

IN THE MATTER of the Native Title Act1993 (Cth)

- and -

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

Elsa Derschow & Ors on behalf of Palyku – (WC99/16) (native title party)

- and -

The State of Western Australia (Government party)

- and -

Brockman Iron Pty Ltd (grantee party)

DECISION TO DISMISS OBJECTION APPLICATION

Tribunal:  Daniel O’Dea, Member
Place:  Perth
Date:  12 September 2012

Catchwords:  Native title – future act – proposed grant of miscellaneous licences - expedited procedure objection applications – withdrawal of expedited procedure statement – Tribunal has no jurisdiction – objection applications dismissed.

Legislation:Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) s 148(a)

Representative of the

native title party:                   Ms Alisha Maharaj-MacLean, MacLean Legal

Representative of the

Government party:                Mr Clyde Lannan, Department of Mines & Petroleum

Representative of the

grantee party:  Mr Kevin Connell, Austwide Mining Title Management Pty Ltd

REASONS FOR DECISION TO DISMISS OBJECTION APPLICATION

Background

1. On 15 December 2010, the Government party gave notice under s 29 of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) of its intention to grant miscellaneous licences L45/235, L45/236 and L45/238 to Brockman Iron Pty Ltd (‘the grantee party’) and included in the notice a statement that it considered that the grant attracted the expedited procedure.

2. On 28 February 2011, Elsa Derschow & Ors on behalf of Palyku (‘the native title party’) made expedited procedure objection applications to the Tribunal.

3. On 31 August 2012 the Government party advised the Tribunal that it had withdrawn the expedited procedure statement included in the s 29 notification of 15 December 2010 in relation to the proposed licences (s 32(7) - Native Title Act).

Conclusion

1. The Tribunal has no jurisdiction to conduct the inquiry as the Government party no longer considers the acts to be ones that attract the expedited procedure.

Decision

1. The expedited procedure objection application WO11/292, WO11/293 and WO11/294 are dismissed pursuant to s 148(a) of the Native Title Act1993 (Cth).

Daniel O’Dea
Member

12 September 2012