Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Doolan v Native Title Registrar [2007] FCA 192
NATIVE TITLE – application – applicant - registration of application – authorisation of a number of persons to act as an applicant - whether Native Title Registrar correct in deciding not to accept amended application for registration - effect of resolutions passed at authorisation meeting – withdrawal of members of the applicant after authorisation meeting but before registration of claim – whether further authorisation meeting required - proper interpretation of 'the applicant' in s 61(2) – application of the merits test in s 190B RELIEF - appropriate relief – registration of rights on Native Title Registrar under s 186(1)(g) – whether appropriate for Native Title Registrar to revoke decision COSTS – whether appropriate for Court to exercise its discretion to make an order for costs– whether actions of Registrar unreasonable in the circumstances - whether Registrar unreasonably maintained his position
Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) ss 61, 62, 66B, 85A, 186, 190, 190A, 190B, 190C, 253 Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) Federal Court Rules, O 4 r 2(1), O 6, O 13 r 13 Native Title Federal Court Regulation 1998 Western Australia v Strickland (2000) 99 FCR 33 Northern Territory of Australia v Doepel and Others (2003) 133 FCR 112 Wakaman People # 2 v Native Title Registrar and Authorised Delegate [2006] FCA 1198 Butchulla People v Queensland and Others (2006) 154 FCR 233 Commonwealth v Yarmirr (2001) 208 CLR 1 Central West Goldfields People v State of Western Australia [2003] FCA 467 Button v Chapman on behalf of the Wakka Wakka People [2003] FCA 861 Walker on behalf of the Yaegl, Bundjalung and Gumbaynggirr People v Minister for Land & Water Conservation (NSW) [2003] FCA 947 'Pooncarie' Barkandji (Paakantyi) People v New South Wales Minister for Land and Water Conservation [2006] FCA 25 De Rose v State of South Australia (No 2) [2005] FCAFC 137 Ward v State of Western Australia (1999) 93 FCR 305 Wakaman People #2 v Native Title Registrar and Authorised Delegate [2006] FCA 1198 KATE DOOLAN, SHAUN DOOLAN, EDWARD DOOLAN, DONALD BLACKMAN, BARRY BLACKMAN (JNR), PETER MARTIN, JAN WILLIAMS, ANNETTE BROOME, DAVINA MUNRO, LES MUCKAN, BEVERLEY SHOOTER, MACKENZIE MUCKAN, CEPHA ROMA, RUTH ROMA, LILLIAN BURKE AS APPLICANT ON HER OWN BEHALF AND FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE BUTCHULLA LAND AND SEA CLAIM AND GLADYS SAILOR AS APPLICANT ON HER OWN BEHALF AND FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE BUTCHULLA LAND AND SEA CLAIM v NATIVE TITLE REGISTRAR, STATE OF QUEENSLAND AND ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA QUD 227 OF 2006
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