Kemppi v Adani Mining Pty Ltd (No 2)

In the case of Kemppi v Adani Mining Pty Ltd (No 2), the Federal Court of Australia considered an application to amend a statement of claim in relation to an Indigenous Land Use Agreement (ILUA). The plaintiff, Ms Kemppi, sought to amend her claim to include additional particulars and grounds for review, specifically to argue that the registration of the ILUA was unreasonable. The defendants, Adani Mining Pty Ltd and others, opposed the amendments on the grounds that they were futile and did not plead an arguable cause of action.

The court had to determine whether the proposed amendments were relevant to the substantive claim, whether they pleaded an arguable cause of action, and whether they were liable to be struck out as futile. The court considered the relevance of the amendments to the substantive claim and examined whether the proposed amendments met the criteria for being considered arguable. Additionally, the court considered the considerations relevant for certification of the application to register an ILUA by a representative body under section 203BE(5) of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth).

The court found that the proposed amendments were relevant to the substantive claim and did plead an arguable cause of action. The court held that the amendments were not futile and should not be struck out. Consequently, the court granted Ms Kemppi leave to file a further amended statement of claim containing the allegations set out in the reasons, with the exception of one specific paragraph. The interlocutory application filed on 6 June 2017 was otherwise dismissed. The court's decision was based on a careful consideration of the legal principles and statutory requirements involved in the certification of ILUAs and the process for amending pleadings in federal court proceedings.