Wintawari Guruma Aboriginal Corporation/Western Australia/Peter Romeo Gianni

NATIONAL NATIVE TITLE TRIBUNAL

Wintawari Guruma Aboriginal Corporation/Western Australia/Peter Romeo Gianni, [2009] NNTTA 87 (10 August 2009)

Application No: WO08/1247

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

-and-

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

Wintawari Guruma Aboriginal Corporation (native title party)

-and-

The State of Western Australia (Government party)

-and-

Peter Romeo Gianni (grantee party)

DECISION TO DISMISS OBJECTION APPLICATION

Tribunal:  Hon C J Sumner, Deputy President
Place:  Perth
Date of dismissal:               6 August 2009
Date of reasons:                 10 August 2009

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

Legislation:Native Title Act1993 (Cth) ss 29, 148(b)

Cases:Wintawari Guruma Aboriginal Corporation/Western Australia/FMG Pilbara Pty Ltd, NNTT WO07/510-512 [2008] NNTTA 17 (7 February 2008), Hon C J Sumner
Representative of the

native title party: Mr Jerome Frewen, Desert Management Pty Ltd

Representative of the

grantee party: Mr Peter Romeo Gianni

Representative of the

Government party: Mr Greg Abbott, Department of Mines and Petroleum

REASONS FOR DECISION TO DISMISS OBJECTION APPLICATION

Background

On 19 November 2008, the Government party gave notice under s 29 of the Native Title Act1993 (Cth) (‘the Act’) of its intention to grant exploration licence E47/1965 (‘the proposed licence’) to Peter Romeo Gianni (‘the grantee party’) and included in the notice a statement that it considered that the grant attracted the expedited procedure.
On 24 November 2008 the Wintawari Guruma Aboriginal Corporation (‘the native title party’) made an expedited procedure objection application to the Tribunal in relation to the proposed licence.

Relevant facts

The Tribunal made directions on 10 March 2009 requiring all parties to produce contentions and evidence for the conduct of the inquiry to determine whether or not the expedited procedure was attracted. The native title party was to provide a statement of contentions, documentary evidence and witness statements verified where possible by affidavit on or before 13 July 2009. The directions contain a statement that an objection may be dismissed pursuant to s 148(b) of the Act if the objector fails within a reasonable time to proceed with the application or to comply with a direction of the Tribunal.
During an adjourned preliminary conference convened on 28 April 2009, the grantee party, Mr Peter Gianni, confirmed that he wished to proceed immediately to inquiry with compliance dates to stand. The native title party made no objection to the request. The representative for the Government party, Mr Greg Abbott supported the request to proceed to inquiry.
The Government party has complied with directions but neither contentions nor evidence have been received from the native title party. During the listing hearing on 30 July 2009, at which the grantee party was unrepresented, Mr Jerome Frewen representing the native title party made application for a two month extension of time in which to comply on the basis that the time was required to gather contentions and evidence. The Government party made application to dismiss the objection pursuant to s 148(b) of the Native Title Act1993 on the basis that the native title party had failed to comply by the compliance date. On 6 August 2009 I dismissed the expedited procedure objection application.

Conclusion

I have previously considered similar cases involving the same native title party as in this present matter (for example, Wintawari Guruma Aboriginal Corporation/Western Australia/FMG Pilbara Pty Ltd, NNTT WO07/510-512 [2008] NNTTA 17 (7 February 2008)), and conclude for the same reasons given in those matters (at [7]) that dismissal of the objection is justified because the native title party has failed to comply with the Tribunal’s directions having submitted no statements of contention or supporting evidence despite having been informed of the possible consequences of a failure to comply. The native title party was aware from at least 28 April 2009 that an inquiry was required, and has provided no satisfactory explanation for its failure to comply.

Decision

Expedited procedure objection application WO08/1247 is dismissed pursuant to s 148(b) of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth).

Hon C J Sumner
Deputy President
10 August 2009

The Wintawari Guruma Aboriginal Corporation initiated proceedings against Western Australia and Peter Romeo Gianni, the current holder of an exploration licence, regarding a proposed grant of a new exploration licence. The dispute revolved around the potential impact of the new licence on the native title rights of the Wintawari Guruma Aboriginal Corporation. The case was heard in the Federal Court of Australia. The legal issues the court had to resolve centred on whether the corporation had a valid objection to the proposed grant of the exploration licence under the Native Title Act 1993, and whether the corporation's failure to adhere to specific procedural directions warranted the dismissal of their objection application.

The Federal Court examined the corporation's objection to the proposed grant of the exploration licence and their adherence to the procedural requirements set out in the Native Title Act 1993. The court noted that the corporation had failed to comply with specific directions given by the court, which impacted their ability to effectively argue their case. The court found that the corporation's failure to comply with the directions was a significant factor in dismissing their objection application. Consequently, the court held that the corporation's objection to the proposed grant of the exploration licence was not well-founded and dismissed the application.

In light of the court's decision, the proposed grant of the exploration licence to Peter Romeo Gianni was not subject to the objection raised by the Wintawari Guruma Aboriginal Corporation. The court's dismissal of the objection application meant that the corporation's concerns regarding the impact of the new exploration licence on their native title rights were not considered in the decision-making process. As a result, the proposed grant of the exploration licence proceeded without the corporation's objection being taken into account.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established