Warrabinga-Wiradjuri People #7 v Attorney General of New South Wales (No 4) [2024] FCA 1458

Warrabinga-Wiradjuri People #7 v Attorney General of New South Wales (No 4) [2024] FCA 1458

The non-compliant Indigenous respondents failed to support their claimed Wiradjuri native title interests with evidence, declined to engage with mediation and case management steps, and were adequately notified of the show cause process. Their interests are properly represented by other parties, and their continued participation would impede the just, efficient and inexpensive resolution of proceedings. Pursuant to s 84(8) Native Title Act, it is appropriate to order their removal. Mr Kemp's claimed interest was unsupported and lacked demonstrable connection; he is also to be removed.

Parties
Applicant: Wendy Lewis; Applicant: Mavis Agnew; Applicant: Martin Delauney; First Respondent: Attorney General of New South Wales; Second Respondent: Commonwealth of Australia; Third Respondent: Blue Mountains City Council; Fourth Respondent: Mid-Western Regional Council; Eighth Respondent: Bathurst Local Aboriginal Land Council; Nineteenth Respondent: Deerubbin Local Aboriginal Land Council; Twenty Seventh Respondent: Mudgee Local Aboriginal Land Council; Thirty Second Respondent: NSW Aboriginal Land Council; Fiftieth Respondent: Wanaruah Local Aboriginal Land Council; Fifty First Respondent: Wellington Valley Wiradjuri Aboriginal Corporation; Thirty Third Respondent: NTSCORP Limited; Twenty Third Respondent: Keith Kemp; Advocate for Thirty Third Respondent (ntscorp Limited): Dr A Frith; Twenty Fourth Respondent: Kerrie Lee Lewis; Advocate for Applicants: Ms S Phillips; Advocate for First Respondent: Mr E Lee
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 December 2024
Procedural Posture
Native Title Removal Application / Final Orders After Show Cause Process
Outcome
Orders made removing 55 named Indigenous respondents (including Mr Kemp) as parties under s 84(8) Native Title Act 1993 (Cth).
Legal Topics
Party Removal, Adequacy of Interest, Case Management, Notice Requirements, Natural Justice
Native Title Party Removal Adequacy of Interest Case Management Notice Requirements Natural Justice

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 18 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wendy Lewis

Applicant

Mavis Agnew

Applicant

Martin Delauney

Applicant

Attorney General of New South Wales

First Respondent

Commonwealth of Australia

Second Respondent

Blue Mountains City Council

Third Respondent

Mid-Western Regional Council

Fourth Respondent

Bathurst Local Aboriginal Land Council

Eighth Respondent

Deerubbin Local Aboriginal Land Council

Nineteenth Respondent

Mudgee Local Aboriginal Land Council

Twenty Seventh Respondent

NSW Aboriginal Land Council

Thirty Second Respondent

Wanaruah Local Aboriginal Land Council

Fiftieth Respondent

Wellington Valley Wiradjuri Aboriginal Corporation

Fifty First Respondent

NTSCORP Limited

Thirty Third Respondent

Keith Kemp

Twenty Third Respondent

Dr A Frith

Advocate for Thirty Third Respondent (ntscorp Limited)

Kerrie Lee Lewis

Twenty Fourth Respondent

Ms S Phillips

Advocate for Applicants

Mr E Lee

Advocate for First Respondent

Procedural Posture

Native Title Removal Application / Final Orders After Show Cause Process

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Federal Court has power under s 84(8) Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) to remove non-compliant Indigenous respondents
  2. 2 Whether sufficient notice was provided to non-compliant Indigenous respondents
  3. 3 Whether the interest asserted by non-compliant Indigenous respondents is adequate to remain parties

Ratio Decidendi

The non-compliant Indigenous respondents failed to support their claimed Wiradjuri native title interests with evidence, declined to engage with mediation and case management steps, and were adequately notified of the show cause process. Their interests are properly represented by other parties, and their continued participation would impede the just, efficient and inexpensive resolution of proceedings. Pursuant to s 84(8) Native Title Act, it is appropriate to order their removal. Mr Kemp's claimed interest was unsupported and lacked demonstrable connection; he is also to be removed.

Court Disposition

Orders made removing 55 named Indigenous respondents (including Mr Kemp) as parties under s 84(8) Native Title Act 1993 (Cth).

Orders

  • Each named respondent in the schedule ceases to be a party to proceedings pursuant to s 84(8) Native Title Act 1993 (Cth).