Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Wulgurukaba People #1 v State of Queensland [2002] FCA 1555 WULGURUKABA PEOPLE #1 (ARTHUR CHARLES JOHNSON) v STATE OF QUEENSLAND & ORS QG 6221 OF 1998
DRUMMOND J 13 DECEMBER 2002 BRISBANE
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY QG 6221 OF 1998
BETWEEN: WULGURUKABA PEOPLE #1 (ARTHUR CHARLES JOHNSON)
APPLICANT
AND: STATE OF QUEENSLAND & ORS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: DRUMMOND J
DATE OF ORDER: 13 DECEMBER 2002
WHERE MADE: BRISBANE
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The applicants have leave to amend their native title claimant application in accordance with the amended notice of motion filed 21 May 2002.
Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY QG 6221 OF 1998
BETWEEN: WULGURUKABA PEOPLE #1 (ARTHUR CHARLES JOHNSON)
APPLICANT
AND: STATE OF QUEENSLAND & ORS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: DRUMMOND J
DATE: 13 DECEMBER 2002
PLACE: BRISBANE
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
1 By the amended notice of motion filed 21 May 2002, the applicants seek to amend their native title claimant application QG 6221/98 in the respects set out in the proposed amended application exhibited to the affidavit of their solicitor, Mr Owens, filed 2 May 2002. It is said that these amendments are necessary in order to remedy deficiencies in the claimant application identified by Kiefel J in State of Queensland v Hutchison [2001] FCA 416 and "to generally update the … Application in accordance with currently accepted practice in these matters". 2 The Townsville City Council ("the Council") opposes only the amendments to Schedules E, F, G, M and N to the claimant application. The other parties to this application either consent to or do not oppose all the amendments. 3 The claimant application was accepted for registration by a delegate of the Registrar of the National Native Title Tribunal ("the NNTT") on 8 September 1999. The State of Queensland sought review of this decision in the Federal Court. In Hutchison, Kiefel J ordered that the decision of the delegate of the Registrar of the NNTT be set aside and that the matter be remitted for determination according to law. 4 The applicants say that the amendments sought by the motion are in response to advice given by the NNTT that the application would have to be amended and resubmitted for registration as a result of the Hutchison decision and in response to other concerns expressed by the NNTT in discharge of its duty under s 190A(5A) the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) which states:
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate