Williams on behalf of Danggan Balun (Five Rivers) People v State of Queensland

The applicants, representing the Danggan Balun (Five Rivers) People, brought an application under the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) and the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) to replace the authorised applicants for a native title claim and to amend the claimant application. The respondents, the State of Queensland and others, opposed the application, arguing that the authorisation process was defective and that the applicants were denied procedural fairness. The applicants sought to replace the authorised applicants to ensure that the native title claim was being pursued by the appropriate representatives of the Danggan Balun (Five Rivers) People, and to amend the claimant application to clarify the scope of the claim. The court was required to determine whether the authorisation process that authorised the replacement applicants was defective, whether there was a traditional decision-making process to be followed under the NTA, and whether the power to allow the amendments was within the ambit of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth).

The court found that the authorisation process that authorised the replacement applicants was not defective, as it was conducted in accordance with the NTA and the traditional laws and customs of the Danggan Balun (Five Rivers) People. The court also found that there was a traditional decision-making process to be followed under the NTA, but that the process was followed in this case. The court further found that the power to allow the amendments was within the ambit of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), and that the applicants had satisfied the requirements of r 8.21 of the Rules. The court also found that the applicants were not denied procedural fairness by the authorisation process, as they were given an opportunity to make submissions and provide evidence.

The application was therefore granted, and the applicant was replaced by the named individuals. The claimant application was also amended in accordance with the proposed amended claimant application annexed to the affidavit of Jessica Marie Ling. The applicant was required to file and serve a re-engrossed copy of the amended application within fourteen days, bearing a statement specifying the matters mentioned in r 8.23 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth). The entry of orders was dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth).