Beattie on behalf of Western Wakka Wakka Peoples v State of Queensland [2007] FCA 596

Beattie on behalf of Western Wakka Wakka Peoples v State of Queensland [2007] FCA 596

The native title application failed to comply with ss 61 and 62 of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) due to inadequate authorisation, uncertainty in claim group composition, failure to provide statutory affidavits and identification of the claim area, and long-standing non-compliance with Court orders. These deficiencies could not be rectified by amendment or delay; the application should be struck out.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 April 2007
Procedural Posture
Application for Native Title Determination / Strike Out Application Following Hearing on Motion Under S 84 C(1) NTA
Outcome
Application struck out
Legal Topics
['native Title Authorisation' 'statutory Compliance' 'procedural Fairness']
['native Title' 'administrative Law'] ['native Title Authorisation' 'statutory Compliance' 'procedural Fairness']

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

Application for Native Title Determination / Strike Out Application Following Hearing on Motion Under S 84 C(1) NTA

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the native title application complies with s 61 and s 62 of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth)' 'Whether authorisation requirements for native title claims were met' 'Proper composition of the native title claim group' 'Sufficiency of affidavits and evidence of authorisation' 'Whether application should be struck out for non-compliance']

Ratio Decidendi

The native title application failed to comply with ss 61 and 62 of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) due to inadequate authorisation, uncertainty in claim group composition, failure to provide statutory affidavits and identification of the claim area, and long-standing non-compliance with Court orders. These deficiencies could not be rectified by amendment or delay; the application should be struck out.

Court Disposition

Application struck out

Orders

  • ['The application filed on 27 January 1999 is struck out.']