Lardil, Kaiadilt, Yangkaal & Gangalidda Peoples v State of Queensland [2001] FCA 414

Lardil, Kaiadilt, Yangkaal & Gangalidda Peoples v State of Queensland [2001] FCA 414

Procedural rights under the Native Title Act only attach to registered native title claimants where the act in question affects native title—i.e., is a 'future act' as defined. Since the appellants did not establish the authority affected native title, the procedural requirements of notification and opportunity to comment were not engaged, and their failure did not render the authority invalid. The Federal Court lacked jurisdiction over State law validity alone, given the procedural posture and absence of native title assertion.

Parties
Appellants: The Lardil, Kaiadilt, Yangkaal and Gangalidda Peoples; First Respondent: State of Queensland; Second Respondent: Commonwealth of Australia; Third Respondent: Pasminco Century Mine Ltd ACN 006 670 300; Fourth to Eleventh Respondents: M G Kailis Gulf Fisheries Pty Ltd ACN 007 856 395 and others (fourth to eleventh respondents)
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 April 2001
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Future Acts, Procedural Rights of Registered Native Title Claimants, Validation of Acts Affecting Native Title, Jurisdiction of Federal Court, Statutory Interpretation, State Federal Law Interplay, Costs in Native Title Proceedings
Native Title Administrative Law Future Acts Procedural Rights of Registered Native Title Claimants Validation of Acts Affecting Native Title Jurisdiction of Federal Court Statutory Interpretation State Federal Law Interplay +1 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 33 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Lardil, Kaiadilt, Yangkaal and Gangalidda Peoples

Appellants

State of Queensland

First Respondent

Commonwealth of Australia

Second Respondent

Pasminco Century Mine Ltd ACN 006 670 300

Third Respondent

M G Kailis Gulf Fisheries Pty Ltd ACN 007 856 395 and others (fourth to eleventh respondents)

Fourth to Eleventh Respondents

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Are registered native title claimants entitled to procedural rights under the Native Title Act without establishing native title?
  2. 2 Does non-compliance with procedural requirements in the Native Title Act affect the validity of future acts?
  3. 3 Does the Federal Court have jurisdiction to determine challenges based on non-compliance with State law?

Ratio Decidendi

Procedural rights under the Native Title Act only attach to registered native title claimants where the act in question affects native title—i.e., is a 'future act' as defined. Since the appellants did not establish the authority affected native title, the procedural requirements of notification and opportunity to comment were not engaged, and their failure did not render the authority invalid. The Federal Court lacked jurisdiction over State law validity alone, given the procedural posture and absence of native title assertion.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal be dismissed.
  • Parties afforded opportunity to make further submissions on the application of s 85A of the Native Title Act and costs.