Sandy on behalf of the Yugara People v State of Queensland (No 2) [2015] FCA 15

Sandy on behalf of the Yugara People v State of Queensland (No 2) [2015] FCA 15

Native title does not exist in relation to any land or waters in the claim area because there has not been a continuous, substantially uninterrupted, normative system of traditional laws and customs acknowledged and observed since sovereignty, and no current member of either claim group would, under those laws and customs as they existed at sovereignty and immediately thereafter, be possessed of the relevant rights and interests.

Parties
First Applicants: Desmond Sandy, Ruth James and Pearl Sandy on behalf of the Yugara/Yugarapul People; Second Applicants: Connie Isaacs and Maroochy Barambah on behalf of the Turrbal People; First Respondent: State of Queensland; Second Respondent: Brisbane City Council; Third Respondent: Moreton Bay Regional Council; Fourth Respondent: Redland City Council; Fifth Respondent: Telstra Corporation; Sixth Respondent: Garry Murphy; Seventh Respondent: Brisbane Port Holdings Pty Ltd; Eighth Respondent: Eddie Ruska; Ninth Respondent: Logan City Council; Eleventh Respondent: Commonwealth of Australia; Twelfth Respondent: The Shell Company of Australia Ltd (ACN 004 610 459); Thirteenth Respondent: Incitec Fertilizers Ltd; Fourteenth Respondent: Moonie Pipeline Company Pty Ltd; Fifteenth Respondent: Centor Australia Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 January 2015
Procedural Posture
Native Title Determination Application / Substantive Hearing and Preliminary Determination of Existence of Native Title (other Issues, Including Extinguishment, Reserved for Later Hearing)
Outcome
Native title does not exist; application dismissed as to native title over the claim area (questions reserved as to extinguishment do not arise). Matter listed for further hearing.
Legal Topics
Continuity of Traditional Laws and Customs, Society for Native Title Purposes, Biological and Normative Descent, Connection to Land or Waters, Yorta Yorta Principles, Definition of Claim Group, Traditional Laws and Customs Relating to Succession, Evidentiary Requirements in Native Title, Significance of Anthropological and Oral Evidence
Native Title Continuity of Traditional Laws and Customs Society for Native Title Purposes Biological and Normative Descent Connection to Land or Waters Yorta Yorta Principles Definition of Claim Group Traditional Laws and Customs Relating to Succession +2 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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Desmond Sandy, Ruth James and Pearl Sandy on behalf of the Yugara/Yugarapul People

First Applicants

Connie Isaacs and Maroochy Barambah on behalf of the Turrbal People

Second Applicants

State of Queensland

First Respondent

Brisbane City Council

Second Respondent

Moreton Bay Regional Council

Third Respondent

Redland City Council

Fourth Respondent

Telstra Corporation

Fifth Respondent

Garry Murphy

Sixth Respondent

Brisbane Port Holdings Pty Ltd

Seventh Respondent

Eddie Ruska

Eighth Respondent

Logan City Council

Ninth Respondent

Commonwealth of Australia

Eleventh Respondent

The Shell Company of Australia Ltd (ACN 004 610 459)

Twelfth Respondent

Incitec Fertilizers Ltd

Thirteenth Respondent

Moonie Pipeline Company Pty Ltd

Fourteenth Respondent

Centor Australia Pty Ltd

Fifteenth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Native Title Determination Application / Substantive Hearing and Preliminary Determination of Existence of Native Title (other Issues, Including Extinguishment, Reserved for Later Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether native title exists in relation to any land or waters of the Brisbane and surrounding area as claimed by the Yugara/Yugarapul and Turrbal People
  2. 2 Whether a normative system of traditional laws and customs existed in the claim area at sovereignty
  3. 3 Whether applicants are descended from members of the society which possessed relevant rights and interests at sovereignty

Ratio Decidendi

Native title does not exist in relation to any land or waters in the claim area because there has not been a continuous, substantially uninterrupted, normative system of traditional laws and customs acknowledged and observed since sovereignty, and no current member of either claim group would, under those laws and customs as they existed at sovereignty and immediately thereafter, be possessed of the relevant rights and interests.

Court Disposition

Native title does not exist; application dismissed as to native title over the claim area (questions reserved as to extinguishment do not arise). Matter listed for further hearing.

Orders

  • The questions referred to in the orders made on 30 October 2013 be answered as follows: (a) No; (b) Does not arise.
  • The proceeding be listed for further hearing in Brisbane at 2:15 pm on 11 February 2015.