Korewal People - Longbottom v NSW Minister for Land & Water Conservation (No 1) [2000] FCA 1229

Korewal People - Longbottom v NSW Minister for Land & Water Conservation (No 1) [2000] FCA 1229

The application to amend was dismissed because the proposed amended application would enlarge the claimed area contrary to s 64 of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth), and the further proposed amendment did not cure the substantial confusion and embarrassment in the description and content of the claim. The Court was not satisfied that refusal would create any real likelihood of irrevocable prejudice, and the request for further mediation was too late.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 August 2000
Procedural Posture
Application to Amend an Application for Native Title / Hearing of Application to Amend
Outcome
The application to amend the original application and the application to amend that amended application were dismissed. No application was made as to costs.
Legal Topics
['amendment of Native Title Application' 'description of Claim Area' 'enlargement of Claimed Land or Waters' 'mediation' 'prejudice From Refusal of Amendment']
['native Title' 'civil Procedure'] ['amendment of Native Title Application' 'description of Claim Area' 'enlargement of Claimed Land or Waters' 'mediation' 'prejudice From Refusal of Amendment']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application to Amend an Application for Native Title / Hearing of Application to Amend

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the proposed amended application impermissibly enlarged the area of land or waters claimed contrary to s 64 of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth).' 'Whether the claimed areas were described with sufficient precision to allow the processes of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) to be applied.' 'Whether the proposed amended application was embarrassing because of confusion between rhetoric, possible evidence and assertions of relevant fact.' 'Whether refusal of the amendment would cause real likelihood of irrevocable prejudice to the applicants or those standing behind them.' 'Whether the matter should instead be referred for further mediation.']

Ratio Decidendi

The application to amend was dismissed because the proposed amended application would enlarge the claimed area contrary to s 64 of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth), and the further proposed amendment did not cure the substantial confusion and embarrassment in the description and content of the claim. The Court was not satisfied that refusal would create any real likelihood of irrevocable prejudice, and the request for further mediation was too late.

Court Disposition

The application to amend the original application and the application to amend that amended application were dismissed. No application was made as to costs.

Orders

  • ['The application to amend the application for native title lodged in the National Native Title Tribunal on 27 March 1996, be dismissed.']