FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Ward v Northern Territory [2002] FCA 171
NATIVE TITLE – claim groups – proper applicants – change of solicitor – application to replace current applicants under s 66B if the Native title Act 1993 (Cth) – discretionary power of Court to make an order under s 66B
Native Title Act 1993 (Cth)
Moran v Minister for Land and Water Conservation for the State of New South Wales [1999] FCA 1637 cited
Walton v Gardiner (1993) 177 CLR 378 citedBEN WARD AND ORS v THE NORTHERN TERRITORY OF AUSTRALIA AND ORS
NO DG 6008 OF 1998
O’LOUGHLIN J
8 FEBRUARY 2002
DARWIN
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NORTHERN TERRITORY DISTRICT REGISTRY
DG 6008 OF 1998
BETWEEN:
BEN WARD AND OTHERS
APPLICANTAND:
NORTHERN TERRITORY OF AUSTRALIA AND OTHERS
RESPONDENTJUDGE:
O’LOUGHLIN J
DATE OF ORDER:
8 FEBRUARY 2002
WHERE MADE:
DARWIN
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.These proceedings be referred to the National Native Title Tribunal for mediation, limited to the Tribunal investigating and discussing with the interested parties, being those Aboriginal persons who are or who claim to be the Native Title Claim Group, whether there can be an ultimate consensual identification of the applicants in these proceedings for the benefit of the Native Title Claim Group.
2.The Tribunal report to the Court the results of the mediation as soon as possible, but in any event to report progress within 6 months of this date.
3.The District Registrar write to Mr Imlah directing him to file and serve within fourteen days of the receipt of the District Registrar’s letter either a notice that he has ceased to act as solicitors for the applicants or a notice that he still regards himself as acting as solicitor for the applicants.
4.Mr Kennard within two months of this date file and serve either a notice verified on oath that he has received instructions to act for some or all of the applicants in this matter listing the names of each such applicant and appending to that notice a written verification of his instructions from such applicants, or a notice verified on oath that he no longer acts for any of the applicants in this matter.
5.The document on the Court file, which is numbered thirteen and which is entitled “Notice of Change of Solicitor and Address for Service” be marked by the District Registrar, “Rejected pursuant to the order of the Court dated 8 February 2002”.
6.The application to replace the named applicants dated 6 February 2002 be dismissed.
7.These orders be drawn up, entered and sealed by the Registry and served by ordinary prepaid post by the Registry on the National Native Title Tribunal, Mr Imlah, Mr Kennard, Mr Levy, the seventeen named applicants [at their last known address as shown on the Court file], the parties named in the application to replace the named applicants other than Murphy Simon, Peter Newry, Kim Aldus, and Button Jones, [at their last known address as shown on the Court…
Continue reading Ward v Northern Territory
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Ward v Northern Territory [2002] FCA 171
- Case
- [2002] FCA 171
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the Court included the validity of the appointment of certain solicitors, the process for identifying the applicants for the native title claim, and the procedural steps required to move the case forward. The Court had to consider whether the current solicitors were properly appointed and whether the identification of the applicants could be consensually determined. Additionally, the Court needed to address the procedural applications made by the parties, including the replacement of named applicants and the referral of the case to the National Native Title Tribunal for mediation.
In its decision, the Court referred the case to the National Native Title Tribunal for mediation, focusing on whether there could be a consensual identification of the applicants. The Court ordered the District Registrar to direct the solicitors to clarify their positions regarding their representation of the applicants. The Court also dismissed an application to replace the named applicants and marked a document as rejected. The orders required the solicitors to either confirm their ongoing representation or provide a notice of cessation. The directions hearing was adjourned, and the Court provided detailed instructions for serving the orders on the relevant parties.
The Court's orders included referring the case to the National Native Title Tribunal for mediation, dismissing an application to replace named applicants, and directing the solicitors to clarify their positions. The Court also outlined specific steps for serving the orders and adjourned the directions hearing. These orders aimed to streamline the process for identifying the applicants and ensuring proper representation in the native title claim.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. These proceedings be referred to the National Native Title Tribunal for mediation, limited to the Tribunal investigating and discussing with the interested parties, being those Aboriginal persons who are or who claim to be the Native Title Claim Group, whether there can be an ultimate consensual identification of the applicants in these proceedings for the benefit of the Native Title Claim Group.
2. The Tribunal report to the Court the results of the mediation as soon as possible, but in any event to report progress within 6 months of this date.
3. The District Registrar write to Mr Imlah directing him to file and serve within fourteen days of the receipt of the District Registrar’s letter either a notice that he has ceased to act as solicitors for the applicants or a notice that he still regards himself as acting as solicitor for the applicants.
4. Mr Kennard within two months of this date file and serve either a notice verified on oath that he has received instructions to act for some or all of the applicants in this matter listing the names of each such applicant and appending to that notice a written verification of his instructions from such applicants, or a notice verified on oath that he no longer acts for any of the applicants in this matter.
5. The document on the Court file, which is numbered thirteen and which is entitled “Notice of Change of Solicitor and Address for Service” be marked by the District Registrar, “Rejected pursuant to the order of the Court dated 8 February 2002”.
6. The application to replace the named applicants dated 6 February 2002 be dismissed.
7. These orders be drawn up, entered and sealed by the Registry and served by ordinary prepaid post by the Registry on the National Native Title Tribunal, Mr Imlah, Mr Kennard, Mr Levy, the seventeen named applicants [at their last known address as shown on the Court file], the parties named in the application to replace the named applicants other than Murphy Simon, Peter Newry, Kim Aldus, and Button Jones, [at their last known address as shown on the Court file] or where no address is shown, care of Mr Levy.
8. The directions hearing in this matter be adjourned to Wednesday, 14 August 9.00 am. Liberty to apply to any party and to any interested party on seven days notice.
9. There be no order on the Notice of Motion filed on 3 December 2001by Mr Levy on behalf of the parties for whom he is acting.
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.