Sambo v State of Western Australia (No 2)

In the case of Sambo v State of Western Australia (No 2), the applicant, the Central West Goldfields People, sought to challenge the dismissal of their native title claim. The matter was before the court on the application of the applicant for the dismissal of the application to be set aside. The application for native title had been considered on three occasions by the Registrar, but was ultimately not accepted for registration. The central issue before the court was whether the application should be dismissed under section 190F(6) of the Native Title Act 1993 (NTA), given that it had not been amended since its last consideration by the Registrar and it was not likely to be amended in a way that would lead to a different outcome.

The court considered the history of the claim, the ongoing disputes within the applicant group, and the lack of progress in resolving these issues. Despite the applicant's assurances and submissions that they were now in a position to hold a claim group meeting and had secured funding for that purpose, the court found that the claim was unlikely to be amended in a way that would result in its registration. The court noted that while the applicant had gathered anthropological and other evidence to support the claim, this evidence would not be destroyed by the dismissal of the application and could be used in any future application. The court concluded that there was no other reason why the application should not be dismissed and that dismissal would not prevent the bringing of a further application if that was the course advised by the members of the native title claim group or any other claim group that might be formed.

The court dismissed the application under section 190F(6) of the NTA, finding that the application had not been amended since it was considered by the Registrar and was not likely to be amended in a way that would lead to any different conclusion by the Registrar. The court emphasised that the dismissal of the application would not prevent the bringing of a further application if that was the course advised by the members of the native title claim group or any other claim group that might be formed. The decision highlights the importance of progress and resolution of internal disputes within a native title claim group in order to support the registration of a native title claim.