Forrest on behalf of the Ngurrara People v State of Western Australia
Case
•
[2018] FCA 289
•12 March 2018
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Forrest on behalf of the Ngurrara People v State of Western Australia [2018] FCA 289
[2018] FCA 289
12 March 2018
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the case of Forrest on behalf of the Ngurrara People v State of Western Australia, the Federal Court of Australia was tasked with determining native title claims for the Yi-Martuwarra Ngurrara (Part A) area. The primary issue before the court was whether the proposed determination of native title, which had been agreed upon by the parties, met the statutory requirements under the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) and whether it was appropriate for the court to make such a determination.
The court found that the determination satisfied the requirements of sections 87A and 94A of the Native Title Act. The agreement between the parties clearly identified the native title holders, the nature and extent of their rights and interests, and the other interests in the area. This met the criteria set out in section 225 of the Act, which mandates that a determination must set out who holds the native title rights and interests, their nature and extent, and the relationship between those rights and other interests. Additionally, the court was satisfied that the State had a rational and reasonable basis to agree to the consent determination, and that the parties had given their free and informed consent. Consequently, the court ruled that it was appropriate to make the orders and determination sought by the parties.
The orders included a determination of native title in the terms proposed, to take effect upon the making of a future determination under sections 56(1) or 57(2) of the Act. The court also directed that within twelve months, the common law holders of the native title rights and interests should indicate whether they intended to have those rights held in trust and, if so, by whom. If a prescribed body corporate was nominated, it would hold the native title rights and interests in trust for the common law holders. The court further directed that if no nomination was made within the specified time, the matter would be listed for further directions. No order was made as to costs.
The court found that the determination satisfied the requirements of sections 87A and 94A of the Native Title Act. The agreement between the parties clearly identified the native title holders, the nature and extent of their rights and interests, and the other interests in the area. This met the criteria set out in section 225 of the Act, which mandates that a determination must set out who holds the native title rights and interests, their nature and extent, and the relationship between those rights and other interests. Additionally, the court was satisfied that the State had a rational and reasonable basis to agree to the consent determination, and that the parties had given their free and informed consent. Consequently, the court ruled that it was appropriate to make the orders and determination sought by the parties.
The orders included a determination of native title in the terms proposed, to take effect upon the making of a future determination under sections 56(1) or 57(2) of the Act. The court also directed that within twelve months, the common law holders of the native title rights and interests should indicate whether they intended to have those rights held in trust and, if so, by whom. If a prescribed body corporate was nominated, it would hold the native title rights and interests in trust for the common law holders. The court further directed that if no nomination was made within the specified time, the matter would be listed for further directions. No order was made as to costs.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Indigenous Peoples & Native Title Law
Legal Concepts
-
Native Title
-
Consent Determination
-
Native Title Act 1993
-
Exclusive Native Title Rights
-
Non-Exclusive Native Title Rights
-
Native Title Holders
-
Native Title Act 1993 (Cth)
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Mulligan on behalf of the Warlangurru Claim Group v State of Western Australia [2022] FCA 845
Cases Citing This Decision
10
Cases Cited
19
Statutory Material Cited
2
James on behalf of the Martu People v State of Western Australia
[2002] FCA 1208
Kogolo v State of Western Australia
[2007] FCA 1703
May v State of Western Australia
[2012] FCA 1333