King v Northern Territory of Australia [2007] FCA 1498

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

King v Northern Territory of Australia [2007] FCA 1498

NATIVE TITLE – determination of native title

GEORGE KING (MURRANJI) v NORTHERN TERRITORY OF AUSTRALIA AND OTHERS NTD 6024 OF 2000 PHILIP ULAMARI AND POMPEY RAYMOND v NORTHERN TERRITORY OF AUSTRALIA AND OTHERS NTD 6008 OF 2001 RAYMOND DIXON AND JEFFREY DIXON (ON BEHALF OF THE WARNINKI-KAJALANGUJKU AND KURRAWKURRAWKA/KILIKILIKA/WAJILAN GROUPS) v NORTHERN TERRITORY OF AUSTRALIA AND OTHERS NTD 6013 OF 2002 RAYMOND DIXON, JEFFREY DIXON & JIMMY WAVEHILL (ON BEHALF OF THE TURRUTPA-JALAPIRRI, PINKAKUJARRA, MURRANJAYI AND LIYARTU-WALAMARNTA GROUPS) v NORTHERN TERRITORY OF AUSTRALIA AND OTHERS NTD 6017 OF 2002 ERIC KINGSTON JANGALA, WILLIAM KINGSTON JANGALA, JOHNNY BENSON AND JANET SANDY (ON BEHALF OF THE WILYUKU, IJIPARTA, NGIRTINKU, KULARJA, MARLINJA/KIDPAWURRU AND WALAMARNTA GROUPS) v NORTHERN TERRITORY OF AUSTRALIA AND OTHERS NTD 6033 OF 2002 REGINA COLLINS, HAROLD DALYWATER, REX COLLINS, SUSAN RAYMOND, AND RENATA COLLINS (ON BEHALF OF THE JARRIMANU GROUP) v NORTHERN TERRITORY OF AUSTRALIA AND OTHERS NTD 3 OF 2004 OF 2007

MOORE J

26 SEPTEMBER 2007

SYDNEY (VIA VIDEOLINK TO DARWIN)

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NORTHERN TERRITORY DISTRICT REGISTRY NTD 6024 OF 2000

BETWEEN: GEORGE KING (MURRANJI)

Applicant

AND: NORTHERN TERRITORY OF AUSTRALIA

First Respondent

BRANIR PTY LTD

Second Respondent

LAVERTON NOMINEES PTY LTD

Third Respondent

JUDGE: MOORE J DATE OF ORDER: 26 September 2007

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY (VIA VIDEOLINK TO DARWIN)

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. There be a determination of native title in terms of the determination set out at Annexure 1 to these reasons. 2. The native title is not to be held on trust. 3. An Aboriginal corporation whose name is to be provided within 12 months, or such further time as the Court may allow, is: (a) to be the prescribed body corporate for the purposes of subs 57(2) of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) ('the Act'); (b) to perform the functions outlined in subs 57(3) of the Act after becoming a registered native title body corporate. 1. There be no order as to costs. 2. The parties have liberty to apply for the following purposes: (a) to establish the precise location and boundaries of the public works and adjacent land and waters identified in relation to any part or parts of the determination area referred to in Schedule D of this determination; (b) to establish the precise location of the boundaries of land on which thee improvements referred to in Schedule D of this determination have been constructed and any adjacent land or waters the exclusive use of which is necessary for the enjoyment of the improvements; and (c) to establish whether any of the improvements referred to at Schedule D of this determination have been constructed unlawfully.