Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Dimer on behalf of the Marlinyu Ghoorlie Claim Group v State of Western Australia (No 2) [2023] FCA 1060 File number(s): WAD 647 of 2017
Judgment of: O'BRYAN J
Date of judgment: 5 September 2023
Date of publication of reasons: 7 September 2023
Catchwords: NATIVE TITLE – application by native title service provider to broaden the scope of its participation as a party to the proceeding – native title service provider funded to perform the functions of a representative body under Pt 11 of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) (the Act) – consideration of the statutory functions of a representative body – consideration of the roles and responsibilities of a representative body as a party to a native title proceeding – application dismissed PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application by native title service provider to vacate trial dates to enable further engagement with persons who claim to hold different native title rights and interests in part of the claim area – native title service provider funded to perform the functions of a representative body under Pt 11 of the Act – application not in the interests of justice and will cause unfair prejudice to the applicant and the State of Western Australia – application dismissed
Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), ss 37M, 37N Native Title Act 1993 (Cth), ss 66, 84, 85A(2), Pt 11, ss 203FE, 203BA(2)(c)(iii), 203BA, 203BB, 203BC(1), 203BJ
Cases cited: Aon Risk Services Australia Limited v Australian National University (2009) 239 CLR 175 Bissett v Minister for Land and Water Conservation (NSW) [2002] FCA 365 Brierley on behalf of the Walbunja People v Minister for Land & Water Conservation (NSW) [2002] FCA 1209 Clancy on behalf of the Wulli Wulli People #2 v State of Queensland [2017] FCA 869 Connelly on behalf of the Mitakoodi and Mayi People (No 1) [2009] FCA 1181 Dimer on behalf of the Marlinyu Ghoorlie Claim Group v State of Western Australia [2023] FCA 930 Edwards on behalf of the Wongkumara People v State of Queensland [2014] FCA 282 Gale v New South Wales Minister for Land & Water Conservation [2002] FCA 972 Goldfields Land and Sea Council Aboriginal Corporation v Minister for Indigenous Affairs [2019] FCA 2010 Hearne v Street (2008) 235 CLR 125 Home Office v Harman [1983] 1 AC 280 Kemppi v Adani Mining Pty Ltd (No 2) (2019) 271 FCR 423 Kemppi v Adani Mining Pty Ltd (No 4) [2018] FCA 1245; 360 ALR 697 Kooma People v State of Queensland [2002] FCA 86 McCarthy on behalf of the Yuggera Ugarapul Applicant v State of Queensland [2020] FCA 1448 Munn (on behalf of the Gunggari People) v State of Queensland [2002] FCA 78 Quall v Northern Land Council [2018] FCA 989 Simms v Minister for Land and Water Conservation [2002] FCA 15; 193 ALR 257 Strickland on behalf of the Maduwongga Claim Group v State of Western Australia [2023] FCA 270 Stuart v State of South Australia [2023] FCAFC 131 Woodridge on behalf of the Gomilaroi People v Minister for Land and Water Conservation (NSW) (2002) 122 FCR 190
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