Linda Champion and Others on behalf of the Central West Goldfields People; Anne Joyce Nudding and Marjorie May Strickland on behalf of the Maduwongga People/Siberia Mining Corporation Limited/Western Australia

Linda Champion and others, on behalf of the Central West Goldfields People, along with Anne Joyce Nudding and Marjorie May Strickland on behalf of the Maduwongga People, were plaintiffs in a case against Siberia Mining Corporation Limited and Western Australia, the latter being the defendant. The dispute centred around a future act concerning the grant of mining leases, which the plaintiffs sought to determine under native title law. The Commonwealth Administrative Tribunal (CAT) was the court tasked with resolving this matter.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether Siberia Mining Corporation Limited and Western Australia could proceed with the grant of mining leases, given the plaintiffs' assertion of native title rights over the area. This issue required the court to consider the balance between the rights of the plaintiffs under native title and the potential benefits to the broader community that the mining leases might bring. The court had to determine whether the future act of granting the leases could be authorised under the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth), specifically whether it could be done without impairing the right to negotiate in good faith or the right to enter into a consent determination.

The court found that the grant of mining leases to Siberia Mining Corporation Limited could proceed, provided that Siberia Mining Corporation Limited and Western Australia complied with certain conditions that protected the native title holders' rights. The court concluded that the future act could be authorised as it would not impair the plaintiffs' right to negotiate in good faith and could be done with their consent. The court considered that the economic benefits of the mining leases to the broader community outweighed the potential impacts on the native title holders, provided that the necessary protections were in place. The court issued a consent determination that the act may be done, subject to the specified conditions.