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.
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
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether current applicant is no longer authorised and new applicants are properly authorised under s 66B Native Title Act
- 2 Whether authorisation process met the requirements of s 251B Native Title Act
- 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.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment