Strategic Minerals Corporation NL/Allan Kynuna, Darren Kynuna, John Keyes, Lavin Keyes, Lawrence Keyes, Malcolm Keyes, Helen Smith on behalf of the Woolgar Group/Queensland

Strategic Minerals Corporation NL and several individuals sought a determination from the Federal Court of Australia regarding the validity of mining leases over land subject to native title claims. The applicants argued that the respondents had not negotiated in good faith in relation to the mining leases, and thus the leases were invalid. The dispute centred on whether the respondents had engaged in bad faith negotiations, particularly in their handling of information about a probable mine and exploration results. The applicants contended that the respondents failed to disclose critical information, which they argued amounted to a deliberate omission or misrepresentation.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the respondents had negotiated in good faith as required by the Native Title Act 1993. This involved determining whether there was deliberate misrepresentation or failure to provide information that could be reasonably expected. The court had to assess the totality of the negotiating conduct and whether there was a genuine attempt to reach an agreement. It also needed to consider the quality of the information provided and the reasonableness of the respondents' actions in light of the information they possessed.

In its reasoning, the court found that the respondents had not negotiated in bad faith. Although there were instances where the respondents failed to provide certain publicly available information, the court held that this alone did not indicate a deliberate failure to negotiate in good faith. The court also noted that the respondents had constructively engaged in negotiations, reaching an agreement in principle. The differing expert opinions on the exploration results did not suggest bad faith. The totality of the respondents' negotiating behaviour demonstrated a genuine effort to reach an agreement, and thus they had negotiated in good faith.

The court concluded that the applicants had not met the evidentiary onus to prove that the respondents had not negotiated in good faith. Consequently, the mining leases were valid. The court dismissed the application for a determination that the leases were invalid.