Murray on behalf of the Yilka Native Title Claimants v State of Western Australia (No 5) [2016] FCA 752

Murray on behalf of the Yilka Native Title Claimants v State of Western Australia (No 5) [2016] FCA 752

Both the Yilka and the Sullivan applicants have established, by the balance of probabilities, that native title exists in the determination areas, comprised of rights and interests found under the traditional laws and customs of the Western Desert Cultural Bloc, and that these rights and interests survive subject to extinguishment by certain grants and public works. The applications are not barred by res judicata, issue estoppel, or abuse of process stemming from previous claim dismissals, as the present claims involve different groups, rights, or circumstances, and prior claims were not determined on the merits so as to preclude subsequent claims. Exclusive or non-exclusive possession is...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 June 2016
Procedural Posture
Native Title Determination Applications (consolidated) / Judgment on the Merits With Orders Subject to Final Form of Determination
Outcome
Native title found to exist in the determination areas for both Yilka and Sullivan claimants, subject to final orders being settled on terms. State interlocutory application for summary dismissal is dismissed.
Legal Topics
['extinguishment of Native Title' 'native Title Group Membership' 'traditional Laws and Customs' 'overlapping Claims' 'abuse of Process' 'native Title Act 1993 (cth) S 223, S 225' 'exclusive and Non Exclusive Native Title Rights' 'res Judicata, Issue Estoppel, Anshun Estoppel' 'aboriginal Reserves' 'recognition of Connection' 'western Desert Cultural Bloc']
['native Title Law'] ['extinguishment of Native Title' 'native Title Group Membership' 'traditional Laws and Customs' 'overlapping Claims' 'abuse of Process' 'native Title Act 1993 (cth) S 223, S 225' 'exclusive and Non Exclusive Native Title Rights' 'res Judicata, Issue Estoppel, Anshun Estoppel' 'aboriginal Reserves' 'recognition of Connection' 'western Desert Cultural Bloc']

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 Determination Applications (consolidated) / Judgment on the Merits With Orders Subject to Final Form of Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether native title exists in the claim areas under traditional laws and customs of the Western Desert Cultural Bloc (WDCB)' 'Who, under those laws and customs, holds the native title rights and interests' 'Nature and extent of native title rights and interests and any extinguishment by previous acts' 'Whether previous dismissals of overlapping native title claims barred the present claims by estoppel or abuse of process' 'How multiple claims over largely the same area by different groups/families should be resolved under the NTA']

Ratio Decidendi

Both the Yilka and the Sullivan applicants have established, by the balance of probabilities, that native title exists in the determination areas, comprised of rights and interests found under the traditional laws and customs of the Western Desert Cultural Bloc, and that these rights and interests survive subject to extinguishment by certain grants and public works. The applications are not barred by res judicata, issue estoppel, or abuse of process stemming from previous claim dismissals, as the present claims involve different groups, rights, or circumstances, and prior claims were not determined on the merits so as to preclude subsequent claims. Exclusive or non-exclusive possession is...

Court Disposition

Native title found to exist in the determination areas for both Yilka and Sullivan claimants, subject to final orders being settled on terms. State interlocutory application for summary dismissal is dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The parties are to consult to settle the form of the determination(s) giving effect to these reasons.' 'By 26 August 2016, parties to notify the Court as to agreed or proposed form(s) of determination.' 'Liberty to apply to vary the orders is granted.' "Any order dismissing the State's interlocutory application...