Richard Evans on Behalf of the Koara People (WC95/1 and WC95/12)/Western Australia/Kinrola Pty Ltd, Australian Mineral Investors Pty Ltd, Quartz Mountain Mining Pty Ltd
[2000] NNTTA 284
•7 August 2000
| NATIONAL NATIVE TITLE TRIBUNAL |
Richard Evans on behalf of the Koara People (WC95/1 and WC95/12)/Western Australia/Kinrola Pty Ltd, Australian Mineral Investors Pty Ltd, Quartz Mountain Mining Pty Ltd, [2000] NNTTA 284 (7 August 2000)
| Application No: WO99/705 |
| IN THE MATTER of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) |
| - and - |
| IN THE MATTER of an inquiry into an expedited procedure objection application |
| Richard Evans on behalf of the Koara People (WC95/1 and WC95/12) (native title party) |
| - and - |
| The State of Western Australia (Government party) |
| - and - |
| Kinrola Pty Ltd, Australian Mineral Investors Pty Ltd, Quartz Mountain Mining Pty Ltd (grantee party) |
| DECISION TO DISMISS OBJECTION APPLICATION |
Tribunal: The Hon C. J. Sumner
Place: Perth
Date: 7 August 2000
Catchwords: Native Title – future acts – expedited procedure objection application – proposed grant of prospecting licences – Tribunal failed to advise Government party that objection application made – Government party granted prospecting licences – Tribunal has no jurisdiction following grant - objection application dismissed.
Legislation:Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) s 148(a)
REASONS FOR DECISION TO DISMISS OBJECTION APPLICATION
On 25 August 1999, the Government party gave notice of its intention to grant prospecting licences 57/925, 57/926, 57/927, 57/928, 57/929, 57/930, 57/931, 57/932 and 57/933 to Kinrola Pty Ltd, Australian Mineral Investors Pty Ltd and Quartz Mountain Mining Pty Ltd (‘the grantee party’) and included in the notice a statement that it considered that the grants attracted the expedited procedure. On 13 December 1999 the Goldfields Land Council lodged two expedited procedure objection applications relating to these prospecting licences on behalf of two different claim groups:
Raymond Ashwin on behalf of the Wutha People (WC99/1) (WO99/723) (‘a native title party’); and
Richard Evans on behalf of the Koara People (WC95/1 and WC95/12) (WO99/705) (‘a native title party’).
It is the practice of the Tribunal for the Future Act Unit to inform the Department of Minerals and Energy (for the Government party) following the 4 month notification period of those tenements in relation to which an objection application has been lodged. The notification period ended on 25 December 1999. On 24 January 2000, the Tribunal advised the Government party and the grantee party that an objection application had been made by Raymond Ashwin (WO99/723). On 1 February 2000, the Tribunal advised the Government party that it had received advice that day from the Goldfields Land Council withdrawing the objection application made by Raymond Ashwin. The grantee party was similarly advised on 9 February 2000.
Unfortunately, when the Tribunal notified the Government and grantee parties of objection application WO99/723 it did not notify them of objection application WO99/705 made by Richard Evans. It was not until 13 June 2000, that the Tribunal advised the Government party and the grantee party that an objection application in respect of these tenements had been made by Richard Evans (WO99/705). The delay in notification was caused, in part, by uncertainty as to whether the tenements fell within the boundaries of the pre-combination Koara claims. Advice was received from the Tribunal's Geospatial Unit on 19 April 2000 confirming that prospecting licences 57/925, 57/926, 57/927 and 57/928 fell within WC95/1 and that prospecting licences 57/927, 57/929, 57/930, 57/932 and 57/933 fell within WC95/12. However, on 6 July 2000, the Department of Minerals and Energy advised the Tribunal that the prospecting licences had been granted on 30 March 2000. Clearly the Government party, at that time, was unaware of the Evans objection and proceeded in accordance with the usual procedure established between it and the Tribunal to grant the tenements.
The Tribunal has previously held (Trevor Brownley & Ors/Western Australia/Heron Resources & Ors, NNTT WO99/564 & Ors, Hon CJ Sumner, 29 April 1999) that in these circumstances the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to conduct an inquiry and that the objection application should be dismissed pursuant to s 148(a) of the Native Title Act. Any redress the native title party has will need to be sought in the courts. Based on this decision, the Tribunal, on 14 July 2000, advised the native title party, Richard Evans, of the Tribunal's view that it did not have authority to deal with his objection. He was invited to contact the Tribunal by 21 July 2000 if he wished to talk to me about the issue. No response was received from Mr Evans and I intend to dismiss the objection application.
The situation which has led to this dismissal is of course completely unsatisfactory. A native title party’s rights have been adversely affected because of an administrative error. The Tribunal apologises for this. Unfortunately, this is not the first time this has occurred and requests have previously been made by me for procedures to be adopted to deal with the problem. There are three administrative steps which should be taken. The first is to ensure that fail safe procedures are in place so that the Government party is not wrongly informed that an objection has not been received. The second is to ensure that where there is more than one objection over the same tenement, the inquiries are conducted together. (s 140 - Native Title Act 1993 (Cth); Para 3.5.4. Procedures under the right to negotiate scheme – Issued 20 April 2000.) This has been a long standing practice of the Tribunal and administrative arrangements should be put in place to ensure that the relevant files travel together at all times following lodgement of the objections. Third, steps should be taken to ensure that the sort of delay which occurred in this matter between receipt of the objection application and notification to the Government and grantee parties (some 6 months) does not occur in future.
The Native Title Registrar assists the President of the Tribunal in the management of its administrative affairs (s 129). I have drawn these problems to his attention to take whatever remedial action is necessary to avoid them occurring in future.
Decision
The expedited procedure objection application is dismissed pursuant to s 148(a) of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) (as amended).
Hon C. J. Sumner
Deputy President
7 August 2000
0
0
0