McKenzie v South Australia

The case of McKenzie v South Australia involved a dispute over the validity of a native title claim made by Mr. McKenzie on behalf of the Kuyani people. The Federal Court of Australia was tasked with determining whether the amended claim should be dealt with under the provisions of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) as it stood before the Native Title Amendment Act 1998 (Cth) ("Old Act") or whether it should be considered a new application under the amended Act ("New Act"). The court was also required to decide whether the claim complied with the requirements of sections 61 and 62 of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth).

The court found that the substantial changes made to the Kuyani claim, including alterations to the named applicant, the composition of the claim group, and the lands subject to the claim, indicated that the matter should be determined under the New Act. The court held that the native title claim group had not been adequately identified or described, and Mr. McKenzie had not provided an adequate statement outlining the basis on which he was authorised to make the claim on behalf of all the persons in the claim group. As a result, the court concluded that Mr. McKenzie had not satisfied the requirements of sections 61(4) and 62(1)(iv) and (v) of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth).

Given the significant changes to the claim and the lack of compliance with the statutory requirements, the court decided that it would not be appropriate to grant a further opportunity to amend the application. The court held that the proper course was for the members of the native title claim group to consider whether they wished to adopt a new application. Consequently, the court ordered that the native title determination application be struck out.

This decision highlights the importance of adhering to the statutory requirements when making a native title claim and the court's willingness to strike out an application if it is not in compliance with the necessary provisions.