Leonne Velickovic (Widji)/Western Australia/Hamill Resources Ltd
Case
•
[2003] NNTTA 10
•10 February 2003
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Leonne Velickovic (Widji)/Western Australia/Hamill Resources Ltd [2003] NNTTA 10
[2003] NNTTA 10
10 February 2003
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Leonne Velickovic, a native title party, sought an expedited procedure objection to the grant of an exploration licence by Hamill Resources Ltd. The matter was heard in the Federal Court of Australia. The dispute centred on whether the proposed exploration activities would directly interfere with the native title party's community or social activities, interfere with sites of particular significance, or involve major disturbance to the native title party's land. The court was required to determine whether the act in question attracted the expedited procedure as per the Native Title Act 1993.
The court examined the likelihood of the proposed exploration activities directly interfering with the native title party's community or social activities. It also considered the potential interference with sites of particular significance and the likelihood of major disturbance. The court found that the proposed activities had the potential to directly interfere with the native title party's community or social activities and involved major disturbance. These factors led the court to conclude that the act did attract the expedited procedure.
In summary, the court held that the proposed exploration activities by Hamill Resources Ltd would directly interfere with the native title party's community or social activities and involve major disturbance. Consequently, the court granted the expedited procedure objection and required Hamill Resources Ltd to engage with Leonne Velickovic to address the potential impacts on native title rights and interests. The court emphasised the importance of considering native title rights in exploration activities.
The court examined the likelihood of the proposed exploration activities directly interfering with the native title party's community or social activities. It also considered the potential interference with sites of particular significance and the likelihood of major disturbance. The court found that the proposed activities had the potential to directly interfere with the native title party's community or social activities and involved major disturbance. These factors led the court to conclude that the act did attract the expedited procedure.
In summary, the court held that the proposed exploration activities by Hamill Resources Ltd would directly interfere with the native title party's community or social activities and involve major disturbance. Consequently, the court granted the expedited procedure objection and required Hamill Resources Ltd to engage with Leonne Velickovic to address the potential impacts on native title rights and interests. The court emphasised the importance of considering native title rights in exploration activities.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Indigenous Peoples & Native Title Law
Legal Concepts
-
Native Title
-
Adverse Possession
-
Legitimate Expectation
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Marine Produce Australia Limited v Mayala People [2018] NNTTA 28
Cases Citing This Decision
4
Marine Produce Australia Limited and Another v Mayala People
[2018] NNTTA 28
Raymond William Ashwin and Ors on behalf of the Wutha People/Western Australia/Doray Minerals Limited
[2013] NNTTA 68
Marine Produce Australia Limited and Another v Mayala People
[2018] NNTTA 28
Cases Cited
5
Statutory Material Cited
0