Yanner v Attorney-General of the Cth

The case of *Yanner v Attorney-General of the Commonwealth* concerned a challenge brought by Mr Yanner, an Aboriginal person, against the Commonwealth of Australia. Mr Yanner asserted native title rights over certain Crown lands in Queensland, specifically claiming the right to hunt, fish, and gather on these lands. The dispute arose from the application of Queensland legislation that asserted Crown ownership of all fauna and flora, which Mr Yanner argued extinguished his native title rights. The matter was heard by the High Court of Australia.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the Fauna Conservation Act 1952 (Qld) and the Fisheries Act 1994 (Qld) extinguished the native title rights and interests of Mr Yanner in relation to the fauna and flora on the land in question. Specifically, the Court had to determine if the legislative assertion of Crown ownership over fauna and flora constituted an exercise of sovereign power that was inconsistent with the continued existence of native title rights to hunt, fish, and gather.

Gaudron and Gummow JJ reasoned that the legislative provisions in question did not extinguish native title. They held that the assertion of Crown ownership of fauna and flora did not necessarily mean that the rights of Indigenous inhabitants to hunt, fish, and gather were extinguished. Their Honours emphasised that extinguishment of native title requires a clear and unambiguous intention by the Crown to exercise sovereign power in a manner that is inconsistent with the continued enjoyment of native title rights. In this instance, the legislation was interpreted as regulating the exercise of rights rather than extinguishing them entirely.

The High Court ultimately found in favour of Mr Yanner, holding that his native title rights to hunt, fish, and gather had not been extinguished by the Queensland legislation. The Court ordered that the appeal be allowed and the judgment of the Full Court of the Federal Court be set aside.