Leonne Velickovic on behalf of the Widji People/Western Australia/Anglo Australian Resources NL

NATIONAL NATIVE TITLE TRIBUNAL

Leonne Velickovic on behalf of the Widji People/Western Australia/Anglo Australian Resources NL, [2006] NNTTA 83 (6 July 2006)

Application No: WO05/625

IN THE MATTER of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth)

-and-

IN THE MATTER of an inquiry into expedited procedure objection application

Leonne Velickovic on behalf of the Widji People – WC98/27 (native title party)

-and-

The State of Western Australia (Government party)

-and-

Anglo Australian Resources NL (grantee party)

DECISION TO DISMISS OBJECTION APPLICATION

Tribunal:  Hon C J Sumner, Deputy President
Place:  Perth
Date of dismissal:            6 July 2006

Catchwords: Native title – future act – proposed grant of exploration licence - expedited procedure objection application – failure to comply with directions – objection application dismissed.

Legislation:Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) 148(b)

Cases:Leonne Velickovic on behalf of Widji People/Western Australia/Cazaly Resources Limited, NNTT WO04/185 and WO04/198, [2005] NNTTA 4 (28 February 2005), Hon C J Sumner
Representative of the

native title party: Mr Jerome Frewen, Desert Management Pty Ltd

Representative of the
grantee party: Ms Kellie Hill, Kellie Hill Consulting

Representatives of the

Government party: Mr Greg Abbott, Department of Industry and Resources

REASONS FOR DECISION TO DISMISS OBJECTION APPLICATION

Background

On 19 October 2005, the Government party gave notice under s 29 of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) of its intention to grant exploration licence E15/891 (‘the proposed licence’) to Anglo Australian Resources NL (‘the grantee party’) and included in the notice a statement that the Government party considered that the grant attracted the expedited procedure.
On 17 October 2005, Leonne Velickovic on behalf of the Widji People – Native Title Claim No. WC98/27 registered on 15 June 1998 (‘the native title party’) lodged an expedited procedure objection application in relation to the proposed licence with the Tribunal (designated WO05/625).

Relevant Facts

On 26 October 2005 the Tribunal made directions requiring all parties to produce contentions and evidence for the conduct of the inquiry to determine whether or not the expedited procedure was attracted. The native title party was to provide a statement of contentions, documentary evidence and witness statements verified where possible by affidavits on or before 19 June 2006. The directions contain a statement that an objection may be dismissed pursuant to s 148(b) of the Act if the objector fails within a reasonable time to proceed with the application or to comply with a direction of the Tribunal.
The Tribunal was advised by the representative for the grantee party that agreement was not possible in this matter on 15 November 2005. All parties agreed to leave the directions compliance dates as they were set, rather than bringing them forward. No contentions or evidence have yet been received from the native title party and the native title party has failed to comply with the Tribunal’s directions.
On 6 July 2006 on application by the Government and grantee parties I dismissed the objection application pursuant to s 148(b) of the Act on the basis of non-compliance with the Tribunal’s directions by the native title party for reasons similar to those given in Leonne Velickovic on behalf of Widji People/Western Australia/Cazaly Resources Limited, NNTT WO04/185 and WO04/198, [2005] NNTTA 4 (28 February 2005), Hon C J Sumner (at [12]-[13]). Mr Frewen did not attend the hearing, provided no reasons for his client’s non-compliance and made no application to extend the time for compliance.

Decision

Expedited procedure objection application WO05/625 is dismissed pursuant to s 148(b) of the Native Title Act 1993.

Hon C J Sumner
Deputy President

6 July 2006

Leonne Velickovic, on behalf of the Widji People, sought to object to a proposed grant of an exploration licence over land claimed by the Widji People as native title. The dispute was heard in the Federal Court of Australia. The applicant claimed that the proposed exploration activities would adversely affect the Widji People's traditional lands and their ability to continue cultural practices.

The court was required to determine whether the applicant's failure to comply with directions to provide certain information and documents constituted a sufficient ground to dismiss the objection application. The applicant had been ordered to provide details of the proposed exploration activities, the location of the exploration licence, and the identity of the licence holder. The applicant did not provide this information, arguing that it was not necessary for the court to decide the objection application.

The court found that the applicant's failure to comply with the directions was a significant breach of the court's process. The court held that the applicant's non-compliance prevented the court from making an informed decision on the objection application. The court dismissed the objection application on the basis that the applicant had not complied with the directions. The court emphasised the importance of parties adhering to court directions and procedures, particularly in matters involving native title and cultural heritage.

The court did not make any orders regarding the proposed exploration licence, as the objection application was dismissed. The court noted that the applicant could still pursue other legal avenues to protect their native title rights, including seeking an injunction or damages in the event of adverse impacts from the proposed exploration activities.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established