Sebastian v State of Western Australia [2008] FCA 926

Sebastian v State of Western Australia [2008] FCA 926

There are no arguable serious issues to be tried because (1) the Rubibi applicant remains the registered native title claimant and is the native title party for the purpose of negotiating future acts with the State until a prescribed body corporate is determined; (2) the Rubibi applicant was validly authorised to represent the Yawuru community, including the Walman Yawuru, no challenge to authorisation having previously been made; (3) the motion for interlocutory injunctive relief therefore has no reasonable prospect of success and should be summarily dismissed under s 31A of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth).

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 June 2008
Procedural Posture
Native Title Proceedings and Motion for Summary Dismissal / Interlocutory Application for Summary Dismissal of Motion for Interlocutory Injunctive Relief
Outcome
Summary dismissal of the notice of motion for interlocutory injunctive relief; no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
['native Title Determination' 'summary Dismissal' 'authority to Negotiate Future Acts' 'registered Native Title Claimants' 'prescribed Body Corporate Nomination' 'interlocutory Injunctive Relief']
['aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Law' 'native Title Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['native Title Determination' 'summary Dismissal' 'authority to Negotiate Future Acts' 'registered Native Title Claimants' 'prescribed Body Corporate Nomination' 'interlocutory Injunctive Relief']

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

Native Title Proceedings and Motion for Summary Dismissal / Interlocutory Application for Summary Dismissal of Motion for Interlocutory Injunctive Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Rubibi applicant is still the registered native title claimant and thus the 'native title party' entitled to negotiate with the State in respect of future acts under the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth)" 'Whether the Rubibi applicant is validly authorised to represent all members of the Yawuru community, including the Walman Yawuru, in negotiations and court proceedings' 'Whether the first motion for interlocutory injunctive relief had reasonable prospects of success or should be summarily dismissed under s 31A of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth)' 'Whether the Court is functus officio or retains jurisdiction to hear the interlocutory motion']

Ratio Decidendi

There are no arguable serious issues to be tried because (1) the Rubibi applicant remains the registered native title claimant and is the native title party for the purpose of negotiating future acts with the State until a prescribed body corporate is determined; (2) the Rubibi applicant was validly authorised to represent the Yawuru community, including the Walman Yawuru, no challenge to authorisation having previously been made; (3) the motion for interlocutory injunctive relief therefore has no reasonable prospect of success and should be summarily dismissed under s 31A of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth).

Court Disposition

Summary dismissal of the notice of motion for interlocutory injunctive relief; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • ['The notice of motion of Margaret Mary Robinson, Edward Leonard Roe and Peter Nuggett Matsumoto dated 6 May 2008 is dismissed.' 'No order as to costs.']