Kurrku Claim Group/Western Australia/Wayne Craig Van Blitterswyk
[2012] NNTTA 123
•21 November 2012
NATIONAL NATIVE TITLE TRIBUNAL
Kurrku Claim Group/Western Australia/Wayne Craig Van Blitterswyk, [2012] NNTTA 123 (21 November 2012)
Application No: WO12/35
WO12/36
WO12/37
IN THE MATTER of the Native Title Act1993 (Cth)
- and -
IN THE MATTER of an inquiry into expedited procedure objection applications
Kurrku Claim Group (WC10/18) (native title party)
- and -
The State of Western Australia (Government party)
- and -
Wayne Craig Van Blitterswyk (grantee party)
DECISION TO DISMISS OBJECTION APPLICATIONS
Tribunal: President Graeme Neate
Place: Brisbane
Date: 21 November 2012
Catchwords: Native title – future acts – proposed grant of prospecting licenses – expedited procedure objection applications – Government party refuse tenement applications – Tribunal has no jurisdiction – objection applications dismissed
Legislation: Native Title Act 1993 (Cth), ss 29, 148(a)
Mining Act 1978 (WA), s 111A
Representative of the
native title party: Bianca MacLean, Goldfields Land and Sea Council
Representative of the
Government party: Mr Clyde Lannan, Department of Mines and Petroleum
Representative of the
grantee party: Mr Wayne Craig Van Blitterswyk
REASONS FOR DECISION TO DISMISS OBJECTION APPLICATIONS
Background
On 16 September 2011, the State of Western Australia (‘the Government party’) gave notice under s 29 of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) (‘the Act’) of its intention to grant prospecting licences 37/8050, 37/8051 and 37/8054 to Wayne Craig Van Blitterswyk (‘the grantee party’) and included in the notice a statement that it considered that the grants attracted the expedited procedure.
On 17 January 2012, the Kurrku Claim Group (‘the native title party’) made an expedited procedure objection application to the Tribunal in relation to the proposed licences.
On 30 January 2012, the Tribunal made directions for all parties to produce contentions and evidence for the conduct of the inquiry to determine whether or not the expedited procedure was attracted.
By the first preliminary conference on 14 February 2012, the Tribunal had not been able to obtain a telephone number or email address for the grantee party. A letter was written to the grantee party following the conference requesting him to contact the Tribunal.
Three more adjourned preliminary conferences were held, but the grantee party did not participate. Letters were sent after each conference to the grantee party, requesting he contact the Tribunal. At the adjourned preliminary conference on 10 April 2012, all parties agreed to initiate non-participatory proceedings and the directions were vacated.
The grantee party was notified by letter on 4 May 2012 that the matters had not progressed without his participation and it was possible that the tenement would be refused by the Government party. The grantee party was given 14 days to reply.
On 24 May 2012, after no contact from the grantee party, the Tribunal wrote to the Department of Mines and Petroleum (‘the Department’) requesting that it consider actions it may take in resolving the matters, including the possibility of refusal of the tenement.
One 12 June 2012, the Department issued a letter to the grantee party, notifying him of the Department’s intention to initiate refusal proceedings. On 16 July 2012, as a consequence of the failure of the grantee party to participate in Tribunal conferences relating to the objections, and having had no contact from the grantee party, the Department initiated refusal proceedings.
On 20 November 2012, the Department, on behalf of the Government Party, advised the Tribunal that the prospecting licence applications had been refused under s 111A of the Mining Act 1978 (WA). As there is now no proposal to do the future acts, the Tribunal no longer has jurisdiction to deal with the objection applications.
Decision
The expedited procedure objection applications WO12/35, WO12/36, WO12/37 are dismissed under s 148(a) of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth).
Graeme Neate
President
0
0
0