Harris v State Minister for the State of Queensland [2024] FCA 1059

Harris v State Minister for the State of Queensland [2024] FCA 1059

The applicant discharged the burden of proof on the balance of probabilities. The evidence did not establish continuous acknowledgment and observance of traditional laws and customs, nor maintenance of connection by contemporary descendants of the Aboriginal peoples with the Non-claimant Area from effective sovereignty to the present. The Court was not satisfied it was possible to identify relevant apical ancestors, or that any group maintained native title rights and interests according to the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth). Therefore, native title does not exist in relation to the Non-claimant Area.

Parties
Applicant: Scott Alexander Harris; First Respondent: State Minister for the State of Queensland; Second Respondent: North Queensland Land Council Native Title Representative Body Aboriginal Corporation (ICN 1996)
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Contested Native Title (non Claimant) Application / Final Judgment
Outcome
Native title does not exist in relation to the Non-claimant Area.
Legal Topics
Native Title Determination, Continuity of Traditional Laws and Customs, Connection to Land Under Native Title Act, Non Claimant Native Title Application, Identification of Apical Ancestors
Native Title Administrative Law Property Law Native Title Determination Continuity of Traditional Laws and Customs Connection to Land Under Native Title Act Non Claimant Native Title Application Identification of Apical Ancestors

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 3 Authorities cited 34 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Scott Alexander Harris

Applicant

State Minister for the State of Queensland

First Respondent

North Queensland Land Council Native Title Representative Body Aboriginal Corporation (ICN 1996)

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Contested Native Title (non Claimant) Application / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether native title exists in the Non-claimant Area under s 223 Native Title Act 1993 (Cth)
  2. 2 Whether there are identifiable communal, group or individual rights and interests possessed under traditional laws and traditional customs
  3. 3 Whether there has been continuity of traditional laws and customs in the Non-claimant Area since sovereignty

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant discharged the burden of proof on the balance of probabilities. The evidence did not establish continuous acknowledgment and observance of traditional laws and customs, nor maintenance of connection by contemporary descendants of the Aboriginal peoples with the Non-claimant Area from effective sovereignty to the present. The Court was not satisfied it was possible to identify relevant apical ancestors, or that any group maintained native title rights and interests according to the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth). Therefore, native title does not exist in relation to the Non-claimant Area.

Court Disposition

Native title does not exist in relation to the Non-claimant Area.

Orders

  • Native title does not exist in relation to the land and waters contained within the lease area that is Lot 4 on Crown Plan SE1 in the State of Queensland in respect of which there is no approved native title determination.