Mabo & Ors v The State of Queensland

The parties to this proceeding are Mabo and others, the plaintiffs, and the State of Queensland, the defendant. The plaintiffs, who brought the action on behalf of themselves and members of their respective Aboriginal communities, sought a declaration that certain laws of Queensland were invalid. The case was heard in the High Court of Australia.

The central legal issue before the High Court was the recognition and nature of native title in Australia, specifically whether the common law of Australia recognised the existence of native title rights and interests in land at the time of British settlement and whether these rights had been extinguished by subsequent legislation and Crown grants. The plaintiffs also contended that the common law of Australia did not permit the Crown to acquire absolute beneficial ownership of land in Australia, and that the concept of *terra nullius* was not applicable to the Australian continent.

The plaintiffs' submissions, as presented by Mr Castan, referred to historical cases such as *Reg v Bonjon* (1841) to illustrate the early colonial understanding of the applicability of English law to Aboriginal peoples and the impact of settlement on their traditional lands. This historical context was used to argue against the notion that Australia was *terra nullius* at the time of settlement, suggesting that the Crown's acquisition of land was not absolute and that pre-existing rights of Indigenous inhabitants were not automatically extinguished. The arguments explored the historical treatment of Aboriginal peoples and their connection to land, challenging the legal foundations upon which Crown sovereignty and land ownership were asserted.