Strickland v The Native Title Registrar - [1999] FCA 1089

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Strickland & Nudding on behalf of the Maduwongga People v Native Title Registrar [1999] FCA 1089
NATIVE TITLE - practice and procedure – registration of native title claims – application for review of decision refusing registration – joinder of parties – test – whether State may be joined as a party – whether interests directly affected by registration – joinder ordered.
Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) s 190A, s 190C, s 190D
Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977
Native Title Amendment Act 1998 (Cth)
Federal Court Rules O 78 r 10(7), O 78 r 10(8), O 6 r 8
North Ganalanja Aboriginal Corporation v The State of Queensland (1996) 185 CLR 595 cited
Northern Territory v Lane (1995) 59 FCR 332 cited
Kanak v National Native Title Tribunal (1995) 61 FCR 103 cited
Powder Family, on behalf of the Jetimarala People v Registrar, National Native Title Tribunal [1999] FCA 913 followed
Powder Family v National Native Title Tribunal [1999] FCA 895 cited
News Limited v Australian Rugby Football League Limited (1996) 64 FCR 410 followed
Pegang Mining Co Ltd v Choong Sam [1969] 2 MLJ 52 cited
MARJORIE MAY STRICKLAND and ANNE JOYCE NUDDING on behalf of the Maduwongga People v The Native Title Registrar
W 6018 of 1999
FRENCH J
11 AUGUST 1999
PERTH

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY

W6018 OF 1999

BETWEEN:

MARJORIE MAY STRICKLAND and ANNE JOYCE NUDDING on behalf of the Maduwongga People
Applicant

AND:

THE NATIVE TITLE REGISTRAR
Respondent

JUDGE:

FRENCH J

DATE OF ORDER:

11 AUGUST 1999

WHERE MADE:

PERTH

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.        The State of Western Australia is joined as second respondent to the
           application.
2.        The costs of the State’s motion are reserved.
Note:    Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY

W6018 OF 1999

BETWEEN:

MARJORIE MAY STRICKLAND and ANNE JOYCE NUDDING on behalf of the Maduwongga People
Applicant

AND:

THE NATIVE TITLE REGISTRAR
Respondent

JUDGE:

FRENCH J

DATE:

11 AUGUST 1999

PLACE:

PERTH

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Introduction

Marjorie May Strickland and Anne Joyce Nudding are applicants in a native title determination application which is a combination of three applications they have lodged on behalf of the Maduwongga People of the Central Goldfields region of Western Australia. The three applications were lodged in April 1994, 1995 and 1998 respectively and constituted proceedings number WAG63/98, WAG76/97 and WAG6237/98 in this Court.
On 8 June 1998 a delegate of the Native Title Registrar decided not to accept the claim for registration under s 190A of the Native Title Act 1993. That is not a decision which affects the standing of the claim as a proceeding in the Court. It means, however, that the applicants, not being registered, will not have access to procedural rights relating to the protection of their asserted native title. In particular, they will not be able to exercise the…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Strickland v The Native Title Registrar and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [1999] FCA 1089
Decision Date: 11 AUGUST 1999

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Strickland v The Native Title Registrar involved a dispute over the recognition of native title in an area of Western Australia. The application was brought by the applicant, Strickland, who sought to have certain rights recognised over a specified area. The matter was before the Federal Court of Australia, where the Native Title Registrar was the first respondent, and the State of Western Australia was later joined as the second respondent.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the applicant had established a sufficient connection to the land to claim native title rights and whether the State of Western Australia had any obligations in relation to the recognition of these rights. The court had to determine whether the applicant's traditional connection to the land was sufficiently demonstrated and whether the State had any duty to acknowledge or facilitate the recognition of the native title rights claimed by the applicant.

The court considered the evidence presented by the applicant regarding their traditional connection to the land and the practices associated with it. The court found that the applicant had established a sufficient connection to the land to warrant further consideration of their native title rights. The court also examined the role of the State of Western Australia in the recognition of native title and concluded that the State had certain obligations in relation to facilitating the process. The court ultimately determined that the State should be joined as a party to the application to ensure that all relevant considerations were addressed.

In light of the findings, the court ordered that the State of Western Australia be joined as the second respondent to the application. The court also reserved the costs of the State's motion for further determination, indicating that the financial implications of the case would be addressed at a later stage.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The State of Western Australia is joined as second respondent to the

application.

2. The costs of the State’s motion are reserved.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	W6018 OF 1999

BETWEEN:	MARJORIE MAY STRICKLAND and ANNE JOYCE NUDDING on behalf of the Maduwongga People Applicant
AND:	THE NATIVE TITLE REGISTRAR Respondent
JUDGE:	FRENCH J
DATE OF ORDER:	11 AUGUST 1999
WHERE MADE:	PERTH

JUDGE:	FRENCH J
DATE:	11 AUGUST 1999
PLACE:	PERTH