May Rosas on behalf of the Karangpurru, Giliny-giliny, Baranangga-ya, Wumawurd, Belerrinyin, Jigayagawun, Wanimiyin-Yiritjpinti, Kuwang, Lupayi, Mayalaniwung, Mulukurrniwung, Warnawarnarl, Wantawul, Yanturi,...
[2003] NNTTA 64
•15 April 2003
NATIONAL NATIVE TITLE TRIBUNAL
May Rosas on behalf of the Karangpurru, Giliny-giliny, Baranangga-ya, Wumawurd, Belerrinyin, Jigayagawun, Wanimiyin-Yiritjpinti, Kuwang, Lupayi, Mayalaniwung, Mulukurrniwung, Warnawarnarl, Wantawul, Yanturi, Jutpura and Turulmajki groups/Northern Territory/Caldera Resources Pty Ltd, [2003] NNTTA 64 (15 April 2003)
Application No: DO02/109
IN THE MATTER of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth)
-and-
IN THE MATTER of an Inquiry into an expedited procedure objection application
May Rosas on behalf of the Karangpurru, Giliny-giliny, Baranangga-ya, Wumawurd, Belerrinyin, Jigayagawun, Wanimiyin-Yiritjpinti, Kuwang, Lupayi, Mayalaniwung, Mulukurrniwung, Warnawarnarl, Wantawul, Yanturi, Jutpura and Turulmajki groups – DC01/29 (native title party)
-and-
The Northern Territory of Australia (Government party)
-and-
Caldera Resources Pty Ltd (grantee party)
DECISION TO DISMISS OBJECTION APPLICATION
Tribunal: Hon C J Sumner, Deputy President
Place: Darwin
Date: 15 April 2003
Catchwords: Native title – future act – proposed grant of exploration licence expedited procedure application – failure to comply with Directions – objection application dismissed.
Legislation:Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) s 148(b)
Cases:Kathleen Parry & Others for the Wagiman, Ngangiwumeri, Malak Malak, and Kamu Peoples/Northern Territory/Troy Resources NL, [2003] NNTTA 18 (12 February 2003)
REASONS FOR DECISION TO DISMISS OBJECTION APPLICATION
Background
On the 24 July 2002, the Government party gave notice under s 29 of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) of its intention to grant exploration licence ELA23610 to Caldera Resources Pty Ltd (‘the grantee party’) and included in the notice a statement that it considered that the grant attracted the expedited procedure.
On 25 November 2002, May Rosas on behalf of the Karangpurru, Giliny-giliny, Baranangga-ya, Wumawurd, Belerrinyin, Jigayagawun, Wanimiyin-Yiritjpinti, Kuwang, Lupayi, Mayalaniwung, Mulukurrniwung, Warnawarnarl, Wantawul, Yanturi, Jutpura and Turulmajki groups (‘the native title party’) made an expedited procedure objection application to the Tribunal.
Relevant Facts
On 29 November 2002, the Tribunal issued directions for the purposes of conducting an inquiry into the expedited procedure objection application. These directions were in the standard form which allows for a 16 week period of negotiations to see if agreement can be reached between the parties on the grant of the tenement before the filing of contentions and documents is required.
On 4 March 2003, the Tribunal received a request from Mr Chris Reindler of Caldera Resources Pty Ltd for an extension of time within which to lodge contentions given that he would be overseas during the period leading up to compliance and had not yet had a chance to review the draft agreement provided by the Northern Land Council.
On the same date the Tribunal also received submissions from Mr Mark Rumler, representing the native title party, and Ms Poppi Gatis, solicitor for the Northern Territory government, agreeing to an extension of directions only on the basis that delayed compliance was applied to each party. Accordingly, I amended the directions made 29 November 2002 by requiring that the Government party provide its contentions and documents by 7 April 2003, those of the native title party by 14 April 2003, those of the grantee party by 22 April 2003, and replies from all parties by 28 April 2003.
On 7 April 2003, the Northern Territory government lodged contentions and documents with the Tribunal.
On 10 April 2003, the Tribunal received the following advice from Mr Mark Rumler of the Northern Land Council:
‘I confirm that in relation to the matter, the Native Title Party will not be filing contentions by the current due date of 11 (sic) April 2003 and that it does not seek an extension of time within which to do so.
I assume therefore that the Tribunal will deal with the Objections accordingly. Should the Tribunal consider excusing the other parties from further compliance with directions and dismissing the Objection application, the Native Title Party does not seek to be heard.’
On the same date the Tribunal received requests from both the Government party and the grantee party that the matter be dismissed.
An objection application may be dismissed forthwith pursuant to s 148(b) of the Act for failure to comply with directions where a native title party has advised of its intention not to comply even though the date for compliance has not passed. (See cases cited in Kathleen Parry & Others for the Wagiman, Ngangiwumeri, Malak Malak, and Kamu Peoples/Northern Territory/Troy Resources NL, [2003] NNTTA 18 (12 February 2003) at [8]).
Decision
The native title party has informed the Tribunal that it does not intend to comply with the Tribunal’s direction to provide its contentions and documents by 14 April 2003 or at all. Accordingly the objection application in respect of exploration licence ELA23610 is dismissed pursuant to s 148(b) of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth).
Hon C J Sumner
Deputy President
15 April 2003
0
1
0