Leedham Papertalk and Others on behalf of Mullewa Wadjari v FMG Pilbara Pty Ltd and Another

The applicants, Leedham Papertalk and others on behalf of the Mullewa Wadjari, sought an objection to the proposed grant of an exploration licence by FMG Pilbara Pty Ltd. The application was lodged under the expedited procedure of the Native Title Act 1993, with the Federal Court of Australia. The applicants argued that the proposed exploration would interfere with their native title rights, specifically their ability to conduct community and social activities on the land, as well as potentially disturbing sites of particular significance and causing major disturbance to the land and waters.

The legal issues that the court had to determine involved the interpretation of the expedited procedure provisions under the Native Title Act, particularly whether the proposed exploration licence would likely interfere directly with the carrying on of community or social activities, whether it would interfere with sites of particular significance, and whether it would cause major disturbance to the land or waters. The court was required to balance the rights of the native title holders with the interests of the proponent in exploring for mineral resources.

The court found that the proposed exploration did not meet the threshold for interference with the carrying on of community or social activities or with sites of particular significance. However, it did consider that the proposed exploration would cause major disturbance to the land and waters. Despite this, the court held that the disturbance was not so significant as to attract the expedited procedure. The court emphasised the importance of considering the totality of the proposed exploration and its potential impacts, rather than focusing on individual components in isolation.

In conclusion, the court dismissed the objection application, finding that the proposed exploration did not meet the criteria for the expedited procedure under the Native Title Act. The court acknowledged the potential for disturbance but held that it did not reach the threshold of major disturbance necessary to invoke the expedited procedure. The Federal Court therefore declined to make an order in relation to the objection application.