Leedham Papertalk and Others on behalf of Mullewa Wadjari/Western Australia/State Resources Pty Ltd

The case involved Leedham Papertalk and others on behalf of the Mullewa Wadjari people, who contested a proposed grant of an exploration licence by State Resources Pty Ltd. The dispute was centred on whether the proposed act would interfere with the native title holders' community and social activities, their sites of particular significance, or cause major disturbance to the land or waters. The matter was heard in the Federal Court of Australia. The central legal issues revolved around the interpretation and application of the provisions in the Native Title Act 1993, specifically regarding the definition of a "future act" and the criteria that must be met to engage the expedited procedure under the Act.

The court examined whether the proposed exploration licence constituted a "future act" as defined in the legislation. It also considered whether the act was likely to interfere directly with the carrying on of community or social activities, interfere with sites of particular significance, or cause major disturbance to the land or waters. The court evaluated the evidence presented by both parties and applied relevant legal principles to determine whether the expedited procedure should be engaged. The court held that the proposed exploration licence did not meet the criteria for engaging the expedited procedure, as it was unlikely to interfere directly with the native title holders' community or social activities, interfere with sites of particular significance, or cause major disturbance to the land or waters.

The court further clarified the legal framework for determining whether an act is likely to interfere with the carrying on of community or social activities, interfere with sites of particular significance, or cause major disturbance to the land or waters. It emphasised the importance of considering the specific circumstances of each case and the impact of the proposed act on the native title holders' rights and interests. The court's decision provided guidance on the interpretation and application of the relevant provisions in the Native Title Act 1993. The court dismissed the objection application and determined that the expedited procedure was not attracted. The parties were ordered to bear their own costs of the proceedings.