Risk v Northern Territory of Australia [2000] FCA 1779

Risk v Northern Territory of Australia [2000] FCA 1779

The majority held that the ordinary and ordinary legal meaning of 'land' in s 50 of the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976 does not extend to the seabed; Parliament did not intend Aboriginal title under the Act to cover seabed areas below the low water mark. Merkel J dissented, considering the definition of 'land' could include seabed barring contrary legislative intention.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 December 2000
Procedural Posture
Application for Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed by majority; costs awarded to respondents.
Legal Topics
['aboriginal Land Rights' 'statutory Definition of Land' 'jurisdictional Boundaries' 'traditional Land Claim' 'seabed Claims']

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

Application for Judicial Review / Final Judgment

  1. 1 ["Whether seabed within bays and gulfs is 'land' under s 50 of the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976 (Cth)" 'Whether the Commissioner erred in excluding seabed from the ambit of Aboriginal land claim' "Interpretation of 'land' in statutes and common law"]

Ratio Decidendi

The majority held that the ordinary and ordinary legal meaning of 'land' in s 50 of the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976 does not extend to the seabed; Parliament did not intend Aboriginal title under the Act to cover seabed areas below the low water mark. Merkel J dissented, considering the definition of 'land' could include seabed barring contrary legislative intention.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed by majority; costs awarded to respondents.

Orders

  • ['The application be dismissed.' "The Applicant is to pay the Respondents' costs of the application."]