Leonne Velickovic/Western Australia/John Stephen Bladon Millward

[2000] NNTTA 368

NATIONAL NATIVE TITLE TRIBUNAL

Leonne Velickovic/Western Australia/John Stephen Bladon Millward, [2000] NNTTA 368 (11 December 2000)

Application No:        WO00/298

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

- and -

IN THE MATTER of an inquiry into an expedited procedure objection application

Leonne Velickovic (native title party)

- and -

The State of Western Australia (Government party)

- and -

John Stephen Bladon Millward (grantee party)

REASONS FOR A DETERMINATION

Tribunal:       The Hon E M Franklyn QC
Place:             Perth
Date:              11 December 2000

Catchwords: Native Title – future act – expedited procedure objection application – application dismissed for failure to proceed with the application within a reasonable time and failure to comply with the Tribunal’s directions.

Legislation:Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) ss 237, 148(b).

Background

On or about 22 February 2000 the State of Western Australia (the State) issued a notice under s 29 of the Native Title Act 1993 (the Act) that it proposed to grant to John Stephen Bladon Millward (the grantee) prospecting licences P16/2065 and P16/2066 (the proposed tenements). The notice included the statement that it considered the grant of each to attract the expedited procedure under the Act.

Objection to the inclusion of that statement in the notice was lodged on 3 March 2000 by Leonne Velickovic, a claimant in native title application WC98/27 (the native title party) on the grounds that the grant would not meet the criteria provided for in s 237 (a), (b) and (c).

A preliminary conference between the parties was held on 27 July 2000 at which the possibility of a consent determination was discussed.  Directions were then set which required (inter alia) the State to provide and serve on the other parties a statement of its contentions and other relevant information and documents on or before 21 September 2000, the native title party to provide and serve on the other parties on or before 28 September 2000 a statement of its contentions to include certain specified information, the documents on which it relied and a statement of the evidence to be given by any witness on its behalf, and the grantee to provide and serve, on or before 5 October 2000, a statement of contentions, a copy of all documents relied on and a statement of the evidence of any witness on his behalf.  A listing hearing was set for 12 October 2000 and the hearing of the objection application listed for 30 October 2000 in the absence of a decision that the matter be determined on the papers.  The State duly complied with the directions addressed to it save that its statement of contentions was not received until 22 September under cover of a letter dated 21 September 2000.  There was no compliance by the native title party with the directions addressed to it.

At the listing hearing on 12 October 2000, the native title party did not attend and had still not complied with the said directions.  The grantee advised that it relied on the contentions, information and documents provided by the State and did not propose to lodge separate contentions.  The native title party’s representative was contacted by the Tribunal and attention drawn to its failure to comply.  The listing hearing was adjourned to 27 October 2000.
At the adjourned hearing on 27 October 2000 there was still no compliance by the native title party.  Its attention was drawn to the provisions of s 148 (b) of the Act and the possibility of dismissal of the objection application for failure to comply.  The matter was further adjourned to 10 November 2000.

At the adjourned hearing on 10 November 2000 there was still no compliance by the native title party and it was again reminded of the possibility of dismissal of its application.  The matter was adjourned for a directions hearing to be held on a date to be fixed. 

The failure by the native title party continued and a directions hearing was fixed for 7 December 2000 by which date there was still no compliance.  Nor was there any request by the native title party for a variation of the directions.  On 7 December 2000, the native title party’s representative was asked why the objection application should not be dismissed for failure to proceed with the application in a reasonable time, or for failure to comply with the directions.  The representative advised that the native title party was away at the moment and was and had been difficult to contact but provided no other reason for the failure to comply.  He asked for an adjournment which was refused.  He was informed that the Tribunal was of the view that the native title party had failed within a reasonable time to proceed with the application and to comply with the directions made on 27 July 2000 but had no submissions to make in response.  The Tribunal thereupon, for those reasons, dismissed the application.

Determination

This objection application was dismissed on 7 December 2000 for the reasons that the native title party failed within a reasonable time to proceed with it and also to comply with the Tribunal’s directions of 27 July 2000.

Hon E M Franklyn QC

Deputy President