Stuart v State of South Australia

In the Federal Court of Australia, the case of Stuart v State of South Australia involved an appeal against the orders made on overlapping native title determination applications brought on behalf of the Arabana people and the Walka Wani people. The central issue in this case was whether the trial judge had misconstrued or misapplied the definition of native title as set out in section 223 of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth). Additionally, the court examined if the trial judge's findings and orders were inconsistent with the determination of native title in favour of the same claimants in an adjacent area. Another key issue was whether there was a sufficient evidentiary basis for the determination of the nature of the rights and interests possessed by all members of the Walka Wani claim group.

The court examined the evidence presented, including the historical migration of the Arabana people away from the overlap area, and the testimonies of expert witnesses. The primary judge concluded that the Arabana apical ancestors had native title rights and interests in the overlap area at sovereignty. However, the judge also concluded that the Arabana people did not presently possess native title rights and interests in the overlap area and did not have a connection with the overlap area by their traditional laws and customs. The court found that the trial judge's conclusions were consistent with the determination of native title in favour of the Walka Wani people and that the finding of a consensus was open on the material before the primary judge. However, the court found that there was not a sufficient evidentiary basis for a determination describing the nature of the rights and interests possessed by all members of the Walka Wani claim group. Consequently, the court held that the appeal should be allowed, and the orders and determination made in the primary judge's decision should be set aside.

The court ordered that the originating application in SAD78/2013 is dismissed, and the originating application in SAD220/2018 is dismissed. These orders reflect the court's findings that the primary judge's determination was flawed due to insufficient evidentiary basis for the determination of the nature of the rights and interests possessed by all members of the Walka Wani claim group. The court's decision highlights the importance of a robust evidentiary basis for determinations of native title rights and interests, and the need for careful consideration of the connection between a claimant group and the area in question.