Wanparta Aboriginal Corporation on behalf of its members/ Western Australia/ FMG Pilbara Pty Ltd

NATIONAL NATIVE TITLE TRIBUNAL

Wanparta Aboriginal Corporation on behalf of its members/ Western Australia/ FMG Pilbara Pty Ltd [2013] NNTTA 110 (12 August 2013)

Application No: WO2012/1209

IN THE MATTER of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth)

-and-

IN THE MATTER of an inquiry into an expedited procedure objection application

Wanparta Aboriginal Corporation on behalf of its (native title party)
members - (WCD2007/003)

-and-

The State of Western Australia (Government party)

-and-

FMG Pilbara Pty Ltd (grantee party)

DECISION TO DISMISS EXPEDITED PROCEDURE OBJECTION APPLICATION

Tribunal:  Member Helen Shurven
Place:  Perth
Date of dismissal:            12 August 2013
Date of reasons:              12 August 2013

Catchwords: Native title – future act – proposed grant of exploration licence - expedited procedure objection application – failure to comply with directions – expedited procedure objection application dismissed.

Legislation:Native Title Act1993 (Cth), s 148(b)

Cases:Judy Hughes on behalf of Thalanji/Western Australia/Regent Resources Limited; Ochre Resources Ltd, NNTT WO05/41 and WO05/567, [2006] NNTTA 18 (23 February 2006), Hon C J Sumner
Representatives
Native title party: Ms Susan Clayton, MacLean Legal

Government party: Mr Clyde Lannan, Department of Mines and Petroleum

Grantee party Ms Nerolie Nikolic, Fortescue Metals Group Ltd

REASONS FOR DECISION TO DISMISS EXPEDITED PROCEDURE OBJECTION APPLICATIONS

Background

On 25 July 2012, the State of Western Australia (“the Government party”) gave notice under s 29 of the Native Title Act1993 (Cth) (“the Act”) of its intention to grant exploration licence E45/3746 (“the proposed tenement”) to FMG Pilbara Pty Ltd (“the grantee party”) and included in the notice a statement that it considered that the grant attracted the expedited procedure.
On 12 November 2012, the Wanparta Aboriginal Corporation on behalf of its members (“the native title party”) lodged an expedited procedure objection application with the National Native Title Tribunal (“the Tribunal”) in relation to the notice about the proposed tenement.

Relevant facts

On 26 June 2013, parties advised the Tribunal that an agreement was not imminent. Directions dates were set for which the native title party was required to provide contentions, supported by affidavits and any other documentary evidence, to the Tribunal and all other parties on or before 5 August 2013.
By the due date for compliance for the native title party, no contentions had been received nor had there been any contact from the native title party requesting additional time for compliance.
On 6 August 2013, the Government party requested that the expedited procedure objection application be dismissed under s 148(b) of the Act for failure of the native title party to comply with the Tribunal’s directions.
The native title party was given until 9 August 2013 to submit any reasons as to why they believed the objection application WO2012/1209 should not be dismissed. No reply was received. As the native title party had not complied with the Directions of the Tribunal, I dismissed the expedited procedure objection application on 12 August 2013 in accordance with the submissions of the Government party.
In making the decision to dismiss this application for non-compliance, I adopt the approach taken by the Tribunal in Judy Hughes on behalf of Thalanyji/Western Australia/Regent Resources Limited; Ochre Resources Ltd, NNTT WO05/41 and WO05/567, [2006] NNTTA 18 (23 February 2006), Hon C J Sumner, where the native title party had failed within a reasonable time to proceed with an application and had failed to comply with the Tribunal’s directions, having submitted no contentions or documentary evidence despite having been informed of the possible consequences of a failure to comply.

Decision

Expedited procedure objection application WO2012/1209 is dismissed pursuant to s 148(b) of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth).

Helen Shurven
Member

The case involved the Wanparta Aboriginal Corporation on behalf of its members, Western Australia, and FMG Pilbara Pty Ltd. The dispute centred on the proposed grant of an exploration licence by FMG Pilbara within the native title area of the Wanparta Aboriginal Corporation. The Corporation objected to the grant, invoking the expedited procedure objection application under the Native Title Act 1993. The central legal issues were whether the Corporation had complied with the procedural requirements of the Act and if the failure to comply warranted the dismissal of their objection application.

The court examined the procedural obligations placed on the Corporation under the Native Title Act. It was found that the Corporation did not comply with specific directions regarding the provision of necessary information. The court held that the failure to adhere to these procedural requirements was significant and non-compliant, thus impacting the validity of the objection application. The court reasoned that procedural compliance is essential to maintain the integrity of the objection process and to ensure that all parties are provided with a fair opportunity to present their case. Given the non-compliance, the court dismissed the objection application.

In conclusion, the court dismissed the objection application due to the Corporation's failure to comply with the procedural directions. The court emphasised the importance of procedural compliance in objection applications and its impact on the fairness and effectiveness of the process. The court's decision underscored the necessity for parties to meticulously adhere to the procedural mandates set forth in the Native Title Act. As a result, FMG Pilbara's proposed exploration licence grant was not obstructed by the Corporation's objection.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established