Griffiths v Northern Territory of Australia (No 2)

In Griffiths v Northern Territory of Australia (No 2), the Federal Court of Australia was tasked with determining the existence and extent of native title rights and interests over certain lands and waters in the Northern Territory. The applicants sought recognition of their native title rights over the land and waters, including the right to hunt, fish, gather natural resources, conduct cultural activities, and maintain and protect sites of significance. The respondents, representing the Northern Territory government, contested the extent and nature of these rights. The court was required to decide on the existence of native title, the identity of the native title holders, the specific rights and interests associated with the native title, and how these rights coexist with other interests, such as statutory rights and interests of the public.

The court found that native title did indeed exist over the specified areas of land and waters. The estate group members, comprising the Makalamayi, Wunjaiyi, Yanturi, Wantawul, and Maiyalaniwung estate groups, were recognised as the holders of these native title rights. The court detailed the non-exclusive rights associated with the native title, including the right to travel, hunt, fish, forage, gather natural resources, live on the land, conduct cultural activities, and protect sites of significance. The court clarified that while other Aboriginal people had rights of access to neighbouring estates and certain rights based on marriage or ritual authority, these rights did not allow for exclusive possession or occupation. The court also outlined the coexistence of native title rights with statutory rights and public interests, ensuring that native title rights are not extinguished but rather coexist with these other interests.

The court further established that native title rights and interests did not extend to certain resources such as minerals, petroleum, and prescribed substances. Additionally, the court determined that native title rights would not be held in trust and specified that an Aboriginal Corporation, to be named within 12 months, would be the prescribed body corporate to perform functions under the Native Title Act 1993. Until such a corporation was established, notices under the Act could be served on the Northern Land Council. The court also clarified that the native title application would not be considered "finalised" until a prescribed body corporate was determined to perform the relevant functions. No order regarding costs was made.

The final determination recognised the native title rights of the estate group members over the specified areas, outlined the specific rights and interests, and provided for the establishment of a prescribed body corporate to manage these rights. The decision ensures that native title rights coexist with other statutory and public interests while excluding certain resources from the scope of native title rights.