Que Noy v Northern Territory of Australia [2007] FCA 1888

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Que Noy v Northern Territory of Australia [2007] FCA 1888

NATIVE TITLE – application to replace applicant under s 66B Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) – where claim group comprises composite of three subgroups – need for decisions by claim group as identified in application – whether appropriate decisions made by claim group – whether applicant exceeded authority of the claim group HELD – order replacing applicant made Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) s 66B Daniel v Western Australia (2002) 194 ALR 278 considered Combined Mandingalbay Yidinji-Gunggandji Claim v State of Queensland [2004] FCA 1703 considered Butchulla People v Queensland (2006) 154 FCR 233 cited Doolan v Native Title Registrar (2007) 158 FCR 56 cited Ward v Northern Territory (2002) 196 ALR 32 cited Chapman v State of Queensland (2007) 159 FCR 507 cited Bolton on behalf of the Southern Noongar Families v State of Western Australia [2004] FCA 760 cited Moran v Minister for Land and Water Conservation for the State of New South Wales [1999] FCA 1637 cited ARTHUR QUE NOY, GABRIEL HAZELBANE, PADDY HUDDLESTON AND MARJORIE FOSTER (ON BEHALF OF THE WAGIMAN, WARAI AND KAMU PEOPLES) v NORTHERN TERRITORY OF AUSTRALIA, TELSTRA CORPORATION LIMITED, NORTHERN GOLD NL, BRANIR PTY LTD, TOVEHEAD PTY LTD, TERRITORY GOLDFIELDS NL AND CAMELOT NORTHERN TERRITORY LIMITED NTD 6023 OF 2001

MANSFIELD J

29 NOVEMBER 2007

ADELAIDE (BY VIDEO TO DARWIN) IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NORTHERN TERRITORY DISTRICT REGISTRY NTD 6023 OF 2001

BETWEEN: ARTHUR QUE NOY, GABRIEL HAZELBANE, PADDY HUDDLESTON AND MARJORIE FOSTER (ON BEHALF OF THE WAGIMAN, WARAI AND KAMU PEOPLES)

Applicant

AND: NORTHERN TERRITORY OF AUSTRALIA

First Respondent

TELSTRA CORPORATION LIMITED

Second Respondent

NORTHERN GOLD NL