Northern Territory of Australia & Anor v Arnhem Land Aboriginal Land Trust & Ors

The High Court of Australia considered a dispute between the Northern Territory of Australia and its Minister for Lands (the appellants) and the Arnhem Land Aboriginal Land Trust and various Aboriginal traditional owners (the respondents). The core of the dispute concerned the validity of certain mining leases granted by the Northern Territory government over land held by the Arnhem Land Aboriginal Land Trust under the *Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976* (Cth). The respondents contended that the granting of these leases was unlawful because it failed to comply with the requirements of the Act, specifically concerning the consultation and consent of the traditional owners.

The primary legal issue before the High Court was whether the Northern Territory government had the power to grant mining leases over Aboriginal land without the consent of the traditional owners, notwithstanding the provisions of the *Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976* (Cth). This involved an examination of the interplay between Commonwealth and Northern Territory legislation, and the extent to which the Commonwealth Act, which provides for the protection of Aboriginal land rights, could override or limit the legislative powers of the Northern Territory in relation to mining on that land. The Court also had to consider the interpretation of the term "mining interest" as used in the relevant legislation and whether the leases in question constituted such an interest.

The High Court held that the *Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976* (Cth) conferred exclusive power on the Commonwealth Parliament to legislate with respect to mining on Aboriginal land in the Northern Territory. Consequently, the Northern Territory's legislative power to grant mining leases over such land was extinguished by the operation of s 109 of the *Constitution*. The Court reasoned that the Commonwealth Act evinced a clear intention to control and regulate mining on Aboriginal land, and the Northern Territory legislation, by purporting to grant leases without the necessary consent, was inconsistent with this Commonwealth scheme. The Court applied the principle of constitutional inconsistency under s 109, finding that the Commonwealth legislation prevailed.

The High Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the orders of the Full Federal Court. The Court declared that the mining leases were invalid and of no effect.