Moore v Mungeranie

The case of Moore v Mungeranie involves a dispute over native title and petroleum exploration licenses in South Australia. The applicant, Moore, sought a consent conjunctive determination under section 38 of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) for the proposed grant of a petroleum exploration licence. The proposed tenement covers approximately 1745 square kilometres in the north east of South Australia and is located within the boundaries of two registered native title determination applications. The issue before the court was whether the Yandruwandha/Yawarrawarrka native title party (YY native title party) could be represented by an Administrator in relation to the proposed future act. The court found that an Administrator appointed under the Aboriginal Councils and Associations Act 1976 (Cth) has wide powers and discretions and can execute documents on behalf of the corporation for the purposes of carrying out a statutory or delegated function. Therefore, the Administrator could validly represent the YY native title party in relation to the proposed future act.

The court also considered the scope of the Administrator’s powers in relation to the proposed future act. The court found that the Administrator had the necessary authority to consent to the proposed future act on behalf of the YY native title party. The court noted that the Administrator’s powers were not limited by the rules of the corporation, but rather by the object and powers of the corporation as set out in its rules. The court further found that the Administrator’s powers were sufficient to enable him or her to enter into a consent conjunctive determination with the applicant in relation to the proposed future act. The court also considered the effect of section 26D(2)(c) of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) and found that it did not prevent the Administrator from consenting to the proposed future act. The court held that the Administrator could consent to the proposed future act on behalf of the YY native title party.