De Rose v State of South Australia [2013] FCA 687

De Rose v State of South Australia [2013] FCA 687

The requirements for a native title determination by consent under s 87 of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) are met, as evidenced by the agreement, appropriate group definition, evidence of continued connection and observance of traditional laws and customs, compliance with statutory procedures, and absence of competing interests. Accordingly, native title is determined to exist non-exclusively in the area described, subject to the limitations and coexisting rights set out in the orders.

Parties
First Applicant: Peter De Rose; Second Applicant: Tjaruwa Anderson; First Respondent: State of South Australia; Second Respondent: Lyndavale Pty Ltd; Third Respondent: Tianda Resources (Australia) Pty Ltd; Fourth Respondent: Tianda Uranium (Australia) Pty Ltd; Fifth Respondent: Tieyon Pastoral Co Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 July 2013
Procedural Posture
Native Title Consent Determination / Final Determination by Consent After Agreement of All Parties, No Trial
Outcome
Native title exists in the determination area as set out in the consent orders; non-exclusive rights are recognised subject to statutory limitations and coexisting interests; native title does not exist in certain areas where explicitly extinguished.
Legal Topics
Consent Determinations, Traditional Owners, Connection to Country, Extinguishment of Native Title, Section 87 Native Title Act, Pastoral Leases, Recognition of Rights, Body Corporate Nomination
Native Title Law Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Law Property Law Consent Determinations Traditional Owners Connection to Country Extinguishment of Native Title Section 87 Native Title Act +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter De Rose

First Applicant

Tjaruwa Anderson

Second Applicant

State of South Australia

First Respondent

Lyndavale Pty Ltd

Second Respondent

Tianda Resources (Australia) Pty Ltd

Third Respondent

Tianda Uranium (Australia) Pty Ltd

Fourth Respondent

Tieyon Pastoral Co Pty Ltd

Fifth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Native Title Consent Determination / Final Determination by Consent After Agreement of All Parties, No Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether native title exists in the determination area under the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth)
  2. 2 Whether the requirements of s 87 of the Native Title Act are met for a consent determination
  3. 3 Whether the claimants are a recognisable society holding traditional laws and customs giving connection to the land

Ratio Decidendi

The requirements for a native title determination by consent under s 87 of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) are met, as evidenced by the agreement, appropriate group definition, evidence of continued connection and observance of traditional laws and customs, compliance with statutory procedures, and absence of competing interests. Accordingly, native title is determined to exist non-exclusively in the area described, subject to the limitations and coexisting rights set out in the orders.

Court Disposition

Native title exists in the determination area as set out in the consent orders; non-exclusive rights are recognised subject to statutory limitations and coexisting interests; native title does not exist in certain areas where explicitly extinguished.

Orders

  • Native title exists in the specified determination area, subject to limitations.
  • The group of native title holders is defined according to traditional laws and customs of the Western Desert Bloc.