Gunaikurnai People Native Title Claim Group v State of Victoria [2018] FCA 23

Gunaikurnai People Native Title Claim Group v State of Victoria [2018] FCA 23

The Court held that the s 66B application to replace the applicant should be granted because the authorisation process was conducted in accordance with the agreed decision-making process, with adequate notice and participation of claim group members, and consistent with previously determined group composition. The application for joinder by Ms Mullett was refused, as her contentions about the claim group composition had previously been determined and no new evidence was presented to justify revisiting those findings.

Parties
Applicant: Gunaikurnai People Native Title Claim Group; Applicant: Beryl Olive Booth; Applicant: Barry Ernest Kenny; Applicant: Roderick James Mullett; First Respondent: State of Victoria; Second Respondent: Commonwealth of Australia; Third Respondent: Carolyn Maria Briggs; Fourth Respondent: Telstra Corporation Limited; Prospective Applicant: Ms Pauline Mullett
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 January 2018
Procedural Posture
Native Title Application and Applications Under the Native Title Act 1993 (cth) / Application to Change Constitution of Applicant (s 66 B), and Application for Joinder (s 84(5)), Reasons for Judgment
Outcome
Application to replace constitution of applicant granted; application for joinder by Ms Pauline Mullett dismissed.
Legal Topics
Authorisation of Applicant Under Native Title Act, Replacement of Applicant (s 66 B Native Title Act), Joinder of Parties (s 84(5) Native Title Act), Traditional Owner Settlement Act Processes, Native Title Claim Group Composition

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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gunaikurnai People Native Title Claim Group

Applicant

Beryl Olive Booth

Applicant

Barry Ernest Kenny

Applicant

Roderick James Mullett

Applicant

State of Victoria

First Respondent

Commonwealth of Australia

Second Respondent

Carolyn Maria Briggs

Third Respondent

Telstra Corporation Limited

Fourth Respondent

Ms Pauline Mullett

Prospective Applicant

Procedural Posture

Native Title Application and Applications Under the Native Title Act 1993 (cth) / Application to Change Constitution of Applicant (s 66 B), and Application for Joinder (s 84(5)), Reasons for Judgment

  1. 1 Whether current applicant is no longer authorised and new applicants are properly authorised under s 66B Native Title Act
  2. 2 Whether authorisation process met the requirements of s 251B Native Title Act
  3. 3 Whether Ms Pauline Mullett should be joined as a party under s 84(5) Native Title Act given her interests and previous determinations

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the s 66B application to replace the applicant should be granted because the authorisation process was conducted in accordance with the agreed decision-making process, with adequate notice and participation of claim group members, and consistent with previously determined group composition. The application for joinder by Ms Mullett was refused, as her contentions about the claim group composition had previously been determined and no new evidence was presented to justify revisiting those findings.

Court Disposition

Application to replace constitution of applicant granted; application for joinder by Ms Pauline Mullett dismissed.

Orders

  • The application under s 66B of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) to change the constitution of the applicant be granted.
  • The Applicant in VID737/2014, jointly comprising Beryl Booth, Roderick Mullett and Barry Kenny be replaced with Beryl Booth, Collon Mullett, Russell Mullett and Wayne Thorpe.