Foster, Lansen & Ors v NT of Australia

The High Court of Australia considered an appeal by Foster, Lansen & Ors (the appellants) against the Northern Territory of Australia (the respondent). The dispute concerned the validity of certain provisions of the *Northern Territory Aboriginal Sacred Sites Act 1989* (NT) and their application to the appellants' proposed development.

The central legal issues before the High Court were whether the impugned provisions of the *Sacred Sites Act* were invalid to the extent that they imposed an impermissible burden on the Commonwealth, contrary to s 109 of the *Constitution*, and whether the Act, in its operation, constituted an acquisition of property by the Northern Territory otherwise than on just terms, contrary to s 51(xxxi) of the *Constitution*.

The Court reasoned that the *Sacred Sites Act* did not, in its operation, impose an impermissible burden on the Commonwealth. It found that the Act's provisions, which required consultation and approval processes for development affecting Aboriginal sacred sites, were a legitimate exercise of the Northern Territory's legislative power and did not conflict with any Commonwealth law or constitutional provision. Furthermore, the Court held that the Act did not constitute an acquisition of property for the purposes of s 51(xxxi) of the *Constitution*, as the restrictions imposed on the use of land did not amount to an acquisition of property by the Territory.

The appeal was dismissed.