Raymond Dann & Ors on behalf of Amangu/Western Australia/ Keith Edward Jackson

[2011] NNTTA 70

NATIONAL NATIVE TITLE TRIBUNAL

Raymond Dann & Ors on behalf of Amangu/Western Australia/ Keith Edward Jackson, [2011] NNTTA 70 (21 April 2011)

Application No:                  WO10/1174

IN THE MATTER of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth)

-and-

IN THE MATTER of an inquiry into an expedited procedure objection application

Raymond Dann & Ors on behalf of Amangu – WC04/2 (native title party)

-and-

The State of Western Australia (Government party)

-and-

Keith Edward Jackson (grantee party)

DECISION TO DISMISS OBJECTION APPLICATION

Tribunal:  Hon C J Sumner, Deputy President
Place:  Perth
Date of dismissal:              18 April 2011
Date of reasons:                21 April 2011

Catchwords:  Native title – future act – proposed grant of exploration licence – expedited procedure objection application – failure to comply with directions – springing order dismissing expedited procedure objection application in the event of non-compliance – objection application dismissed.

Legislation:Native Title Act1993 (Cth) ss 29, 148(b)

Cases:Dixon v Northern Territory of Australia [2002] NNTTA 48; (2002) 169 FLR 103

Representative of the

native title party:               Ms Leas Notte, Pilbara Native Title Service

Representative of the        

Government party:            Ms Ros Dawson, Department of Mines and Petroleum

Representatives of the      

grantee party:  Mr Dennis Hawtin and Mr Keith Jackson

REASONS FOR DECISION TO DISMISS OBJECTION APPLICATION

Background

1. On 5 May 2010, the Government party gave notice under s 29 of the Native Title Act1993 (Cth) of its intention to grant exploration licence E70/3734 to Keith Edward Jackson (‘the grantee party’) and included in the notice a statement that it considered that the grant attracted the expedited procedure.

2. On 3 September 2010, Ramond Dann & Ors on behalf of Amangu – Native Title Claim No WC04/2, registered from 3 March 2005 (‘the native title party’) made an expedited procedure objection application to the Tribunal.

Relevant facts

1. The Tribunal made directions on 21 September 2010, requiring all parties to produce contentions and evidence for the conduct of the inquiry to determine whether or not the expedited procedure was attracted. The directions contain a statement that an objection may be dismissed pursuant to s 148(b) of the Act if the objector fails within a reasonable time to proceed with the application or to comply with a direction of the Tribunal.

2. During a number of conferences held between October 2010 and February 2011 the grantee party representative advised he was unable to verify if he was to remain as representative or if the grantee party was to represent himself. Directions were amended twice to allow the grantee party representative to seek clarification from his client. I convened the matter as part of the non-participating grantee party list on 18 February 2011 where the grantee party represented himself and advised he would review the Alternative Heritage Agreement (‘AHA’).

3. A further status conference was convened by the Senior Caseflow Manager on 9 March 2011 at which the grantee party requested the matter proceed to inquiry. The native title party requested an extension to direction compliance dates which was not supported by the Government and grantee parties. I approved the extension on 10 March 2011 and imposed a springing order on the native title party compliance dates on the basis that there had been no solid indication from the grantee party that an agreement would be reached and therefore, the native title party should have already commenced preparations to comply for the inquiry. The springing order imposed on the native title party has the effect of immediately dismissing the objection application pursuant to s 148(b) of the Act if there is non-compliance by the native title party by the due date, being 18 April 2011 (see Dixon v Northern Territory of Australia [2002] NNTTA 48; (2002) 169 FLR 103).

4. The Government party has complied with directions.  Neither contentions nor evidence has been received from the native title party and no explanation has been offered for the failure to comply with the Tribunal’s directions.  The springing order, applied to the Tribunal directions on 10 March 2011, has resulted in dismissal of the application.

Decision

1. Expedited procedure objection application WO10/1174 is dismissed pursuant to s 148(b) of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth).

Hon C J Sumner
Deputy President
21 April 2011