Lester v New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council [2001] NSWSC 891

Lester v New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council [2001] NSWSC 891

The plaintiff's claims did not come within s 20(2) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 because the primary claim challenged the Council as acting beyond statutory power rather than enforcing a right conferred by the Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983, the Code of Conduct was at most an internal management code and not a right, obligation or duty conferred or imposed by that Act, and procedural fairness was a common law right. The Supreme Court therefore had jurisdiction and the motion to strike out or transfer failed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 October 2001
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion Seeking Strike Out or Transfer for Lack of Jurisdiction / Interlocutory Motion
Outcome
Notice of Motion dismissed.
Legal Topics
['jurisdiction of Supreme Court' 'exclusive Jurisdiction of Land and Environment Court' 'removal of Treasurer of Aboriginal Land Council' 'procedural Fairness' 'ultra Vires Statutory Power']
['practice and Procedure' 'administrative Law' 'aboriginal Land Rights' 'jurisdiction'] ['jurisdiction of Supreme Court' 'exclusive Jurisdiction of Land and Environment Court' 'removal of Treasurer of Aboriginal Land Council' 'procedural Fairness' 'ultra Vires Statutory Power']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion Seeking Strike Out or Transfer for Lack of Jurisdiction / Interlocutory Motion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Supreme Court lacked jurisdiction because the proceedings were within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Land and Environment Court under the Land and Environment Court Act 1979.' "Whether the plaintiff's claims sought to enforce rights, obligations or duties conferred or imposed by the Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983 or instead challenged action beyond statutory power." "Whether claims based on the Council's Code of Conduct and procedural fairness arose under the Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983."]

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff's claims did not come within s 20(2) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 because the primary claim challenged the Council as acting beyond statutory power rather than enforcing a right conferred by the Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983, the Code of Conduct was at most an internal management code and not a right, obligation or duty conferred or imposed by that Act, and procedural fairness was a common law right. The Supreme Court therefore had jurisdiction and the motion to strike out or transfer failed.

Court Disposition

Notice of Motion dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The Notice of Motion is dismissed.' "The costs of the motion are to be the plaintiff's costs in the proceedings." 'The proceedings are stood over to the Directions List at 9.30am on Tuesday 16 October 2001.']