Griffiths v Northern Territory of Australia [2015] FCA 443 | Case summary

Federal Court of Australia|2015-05-13|Before: French J, Spender JJ, Sheppard JJ, Mansfield J

REASONS FOR RULING 1 The present claim is a claim for compensation under s 50(2) and s 61(1) of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) (NT Act). Judgment was given on 19 March 2014 on the issues of liability, reserving for further consideration issues as to the appropriate amount of compensation payable: Griffiths v Northern Territory [2014] FCA 256 (the judgment). 2 The parties subsequently made submissions on a series of issues: (1) whether final orders should be made reflecting the judgment on the issues of liability; (2) how to address the issue of liability in respect of "act 34", one of the extinguishing acts in respect of which compensation is claimed and which was not addressed in the judgment; (3) how to address the issue of liability in respect of "acts 50A-50C", which involve invalid future acts, and in respect of which by the judgment leave in principle was given to amend the application; and (4) procedural directions to progress the hearing of the compensation claim. 3 For the reasons which follow: (1) I do not presently propose to make "Final Orders" reflecting the judgment, but to record the conclusions I have reached in the terms of a Draft Order which will then, when appropriate, become the Orders of the Court in the light of the judgment; (2) the Draft Order will include a term encompassing "act 34"; it will also include the Table which has attached to it the correction to Item 10 agreed by the parties; (3) there will be leave to the applicant to amend the application, in the form proposed by the applicant; and (4) a date will be fixed for further directions in May 2015 anticipating that the process of discovery by the respondent will be completed, as foreshadowed, by 30 April 2015.

(1) Orders or Rulings 4 The significance of the debate on this topic is a little difficult to understand. The Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) (the Rules) apply to the order for the separate trial of the issue of liability. There is no specific order under r 30.01, as it was supported by the parties. Following the trial of separate issues under r 30.01 of the Rules, there is authority to say that an appeal from a determination will lie by leave even if a formal order reflecting the determination has not been made: see Arrowcrest Group Pty Ltd v Gill (1993) 46 FCR 90 at 99 (per French J, with whom Jenkinson and Spender JJ agreed); Town v Australian Telecommunications Commission (1983) 47 ALR 137 (per Franki, McGregor and Sheppard JJ); compare Landsal Pty Ltd (in Liquidation) v REI Building Society (1993) 41 FCR 421 where the separate hearing was but a step in the decision-making process and did not finally dispose of the questions in the litigation, and no order under the then Order 29 of the Rules for the separate trial of issues, and no application for leave to appeal was made. 5 If there were any need to refine the effect of the judgment to an express determination, it is to be done by the Draft Order. It is clear enough from the Order made when the judgment was given, that it was intended that it was finally to resolve particular issues in the proceeding, even though other issues remain to be resolved. 6 In my view, the appropriate course is to prepare and have available a final Draft Order, recording the effect of the judgment in terms of an order which (if it becomes appropriate or necessary during the further conduct of the matter) can be made an order without further debate (the Draft Order). The terms of that order are in accordance with Annexure A to these reasons for ruling and are entitled "Draft Order". 7 The judgment decided, on the matter of liability, that the native title holders of the subject land are entitled to compensation for certain acts that impair or extinguish native title, and are not entitled to compensation in relation to certain other acts which were the subject of their claims. That followed extensive submissions in respect of a number of different pieces of land, but primarily on two issues. 8 The first is whether or not Crown to Crown grants, or particular use of the land, extinguished native title under s 23B(9C) and s 23C(1) of the NT Act (concerning claimed acts 4, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 26, 28 and 30). It was held by the judgment that Crown to Crown grants are not to be considered as exclusive possession acts. The consequence is that the native title holders are entitled to compensation under ss 17 and 20 of the NT Act for the impairment (but not the extinguishment) of their native title, and are entitled compensation under s 23J of the NT Act for any later extinguishing acts. 9 The second main issue concerned whether s 47B of the NT Act operated to apply the non-extinguishment principle to the creation of prior interests. That issue is relevant to claimed acts 34, 37, 38 and 39 occurring within what was defined as the Part A. No 1 area, where the Court had determined in the earlier native title proceedings that s 47B applies to that area. It was held that s 47B does not apply to an application for the determination of compensation, so that prior partial extinguishment by the grant of pastoral leases is not to be disregarded. At the time of the later claimed compensable acts, exclusive native title was not "revived" and the relevant native title interests were non-exclusive. Consequently, it was found that acts 37, 38 and 39 (grants of grazing licences) had no effect greater than the historic pastoral leases and are not compensable. The appropriate order, in those circumstances, is that the compensation application should be dismissed in relation to acts 37, 38 and 39. 10 I have dealt separately with act 34 in the next section of these reasons for ruling. 11 However, in my view, it is not desirable (despite the direction that there be a separate hearing on the question of liability to pay compensation) that final orders should now be made on the issues of liability. To do so might facilitate the further fragmentation of the hearing. The fact that I am leaving the orders as the Draft Orders reflects my view that it is preferable for all remaining issues in this proceeding to be resolved before any appeal. An appeal by leave made from the judgment, either by the applicant or by the respondent to the Full Court, and depending on the outcome of that appeal, to the High Court by leave would occupy further time and possibly further delay the hearing of the remaining issues. I think it is more satisfactory in the interests of justice for all issues now to be addressed, so that the judgment is a step along the way to final determination of the proceedings. Ultimately, the Draft Order (if final orders are to be made) will be complemented by the assessment of the appropriate compensation. Any appeal can then deal with all issues without the risk of there being two separate sequential appeal processes, and the delay in the quantification which might follow from the first sequential appeal process being undertaken. I accept, of course, as counsel said that it is not presently intended to appeal at this point from any orders reflecting the judgment. The comment was made in submissions that the applicant had no "present intention" to appeal, depending upon how the case progresses. The liberty to apply which I have given leaves the parties the opportunity to seek the making of orders in those terms, in the event that leave to appeal is sought, and it will accommodate, if appropriate circumstances arise, that circumstance. 12 I have not overlooked the suggestion which the parties have made that the final orders build in an undertaking on the part of the applicant and the respondent not to appeal pending the hearing and determination of the quantification of the compensation. In my view, that is somewhat of an artificial contrivance concealing rather than exposing the factors to which I have referred. More importantly, it would impose an obstacle to the exercise of the rights the parties have presently to seek leave to appeal. I do not think it is appropriate to do so. 13 Finally, I mention in this regard, that I understood from certain submissions that the parties intended to ask the Court to assess compensation for the acts which the judgment would otherwise indicate are not compensable, on the basis that it is desirable for all issues to be decided once and for all at first instance so that full appeal rights (if sought to be exercised) can be undertaken in relation to all issues. 14 The Draft Order, in its terms, is not itself the subject of dispute.

(2) Claimed act 34 15 It is accepted, following the judgment, that claimed act 34 (the grant of Crown Lease Term 624) is to be treated as extinguishing non-exclusive native title. That is contrary to the applicant's contention that the non-extinguishment principle applies to that act to suspend any native title subsisting at the time of the grant. It is common ground, therefore, that the disposition of the claim in respect of act 34 should be an order that the native title holders are entitled under s 23J of the NT Act to compensation for extinguishment of their native title by act 34.

(3) Claimed amendment in relation to acts 50A-50C 16 The judgment has indicated that leave to amend the compensation application is to be granted. In the absence of submissions as to there being any dispute about the appropriate orders which should follow, there will be orders giving leave to amend the application in the form proposed by the applicant. 17 I note that this claim as now amended involves an action in the nature of damages for trespass for grants made and actions taken by the respondent over Lots 82, 83 and 84 that are invalid to the extent that they affect native title by virtue of ss 24AA(2) and 24OA of the NT Act. As I indicated, I am satisfied that the Court has jurisdiction to entertain that claim: s 39B(1A)(c) of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), s 213(2) of the NT Act and see Edwards v Santos Ltd (2011) 242 CLR 421 at [41] and [45], and LNC Industries Ltd v BMW (Australia Ltd) (1983) 151 CLR 575 at 582-583.

(4) Procedural orders 18 The parties were largely agreed upon a timetable. 19 At the time of the hearing to decide the appropriate orders, there was evidence provided by the respondent (the affidavit of Jennifer Laurence) that the extensive discovery required by the applicant from the respondent would take a considerable time to complete, and would not be completed until April 2015. I anticipate, therefore, that will shortly be completed, and that in the meantime discovery has been progressively given in waves. 20 It is now appropriate to accommodate any further pleadings issues, to give directions for the exchange of evidence, to address any other pre-trial processes, to address the most efficient way in which documentary material should be produced without unnecessary duplication, and to determine the location and time to be set aside for the hearing. There may be other interlocutory issues to address. It may be that a number of the steps foreshadowed by the parties have been progressed as they then anticipated. 21 The Draft Order, by reference to the Table with the judgment, means that I will amend Item 10 of the Table, as agreed, by omitting "CLT 674" and substituting "CLT 655". 22 Following this Ruling I will set a further directions hearing in May 2015, at a time to meet the convenience of the parties and counsel. The proposed procedural directions may also be able to be agreed. It may require some alteration from the timetable previously proposed. I certify that the preceding twenty-two (22) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Ruling herein of the Honourable Justice Mansfield.

Associate: Dated: 13 May 2015 ANNEXURE A No: NTD 18/2011

Federal Court of Australia District Registry: Northern Territory Division: General ALLAN GRIFFITHS AND LORRAINE JONES ON BEHALF OF THE NGALIWURRU AND NUNGALI PEOPLES Applicant NORTHERN TERRITORY OF AUSTRALIA Respondent ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA Intervenor DRAFT ORDER JUDGE: Justice Mansfield DATE OF ORDER: - WHERE MADE: -

Note: In this Draft Order: (1) "past act", "previous exclusive possession act" and "non-extinguishment principle" have the meaning given by the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) (the Act); (2) "exclusive native title", "non-exclusive native title" and "native title holders" have the meaning given by the Interim Statement of Agreed Facts dated 2 May 2012 at [2], [3] and [4]; (3) the numbered acts referred to in these orders are the subject of the compensation claims in the Applicant's Amended Particulars dated 17 October 2012; (4) the Applicant has withdrawn the claims for compensation made for acts 35, 42, 49A and 55. THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

The native title holders are entitled to compensation, to be assessed, in relation to acts 1 to 34, 36, 40 to 41, 43 to 50, 51 to 54 and 56 to 59; and: Grants that are category D past acts that impair native title (1) each of acts 1, 3, 15, 17, 19, 21, 23, 25, 27, 29, 36 and 41 is a category D past act attributable to the Respondent to which the non-extinguishment principle applies that impaired non-exclusive native title at the time of the grant (or dedication in the case of act 41) the subject of the act, and for the duration of the granted (or dedicated) interest (subject to (2) below), and compensation is payable by the Respondent under s 20 of the Act: (2) in the case of acts 3, 15, 17, 19, 21, 23, 25, 27 and 29, the non-exclusive native title in the land concerned that was impaired by those acts was later extinguished by acts 4, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 26, 28 and 30 respectively referred to at (3) and (4) below; Grants that are previous exclusive possession acts that extinguish native title (3) each of acts 2, 4 to 13, 31 to 33, 40, 45, 48, 49, 50 and 51 to 54 is a previous exclusive possession act attributable to the Respondent that extinguished non-exclusive native title at the time of the grant the subject of the act and compensation is payable by the Respondent under s 23J of the Act; Works that are previous exclusive possession acts that extinguish native title (4) each of acts 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 26, 28, 30, 43, 44, 46, 47, 56, 57 and 59 is a previous exclusive possession act attributable to the Respondent that extinguished non-exclusive native title at the time when establishment of the works the subject of the act began and compensation is payable by the Respondent under s 23J of the Act; Works (act 58) that are a previous exclusive possession act that extinguishes native title if no earlier works (5) subject to whether or not the land concerned (or any part) was covered by a previously established public work, act 58 is a previous exclusive possession act attributable to the Respondent that extinguished non-exclusive native title at the time when establishment of the works the subject of the act began and compensation is payable by the Respondent under s 23J of the Act; Grants in Part A.1 area (act 34) that are a previous exclusive possession act and extinguishment not to be disregarded in compensation application (6) notwithstanding the approved determination of native title made on 28 August 2006, as varied on 22 November 2007 and 21 December 2007, that exclusive native title exists in relation to the land affected by act 34 (Lot 47) by virtue of the application of s 47B of the Act, for the purposes of the Compensation Application, act 34 is to be treated as a previous exclusive possession act attributable to the Respondent and as extinguishing non-exclusive native title at the time of the grant the subject of the act and compensation is payable by the Respondent under s 23J of the Act.
The Compensation Application is dismissed in relation to acts 37, 38 and 39. Date that entry is stamped: Deputy District Registrar Schedule No: (P)NTD18/2011 Federal Court of Australia District Registry: Northern Territory Division: General NATIVE TITLE ACTION filed by ALLAN GRIFFITHS AND LORRAINE JONES ON BEHALF OF THE NGALIWURRU AND NUNGALI PEOPLES(A) on 29-AUG-2011 Intervenor: COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA ANNEXURE B No: NTD 18/2011

Federal Court of Australia District Registry: Northern Territory Division: General ALLAN GRIFFITHS AND LORRAINE JONES ON BEHALF OF THE NGALIWURRU AND NUNGALI PEOPLES Applicant NORTHERN TERRITORY OF AUSTRALIA Respondent ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA Intervenor AMENDED COMPENSATION APPLICATION (amended pursuant to leave given on 13 May 2015) A. Details of the claim

The Applicant applies for a determination of compensation under s 61(1) of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth).
The Applicant is entitled to make this application as a person authorised by all the persons who claim to be entitled to the compensation, and the Applicant is included in the compensation claim group.
The schedules to this application contain the following information: Schedule A
The persons on whose behalf the Applicant makes the application are: (a) Ngaliwurru and Nungali persons who are members of the estate groups Makalamayi, Wunjaiyi, Yanturi, Wantawul and Maiyalaniwung by reason of: (1) descent through his or her: (i) father's father; (ii) mother's father; (iii) father's mother; (iv) mother's mother; or (2) having been adopted or incorporated into the descent relationships referred to in (1); (b) other Aboriginal persons who, extinguishment issues apart, in accordance with traditional laws and customs, have rights in respect of land and waters of the relevant estate group, being: (1) members of estate groups from neighbouring estates; (2) spouses of estate group members; (3) members of other estate groups with ritual authority; being the persons determined in the earlier native title proceedings referred to at [3] as the native title holders of the land and waters making up Part A of the area covered by the application.
The area covered by the application comprises the whole or part of the five estates referred to at [1], which are held respectively by the members of the estate groups referred to at 1.
The land and waters making up Part A of the area covered by the application under the orders of the Federal Court made in proceedings NTD 6012 of 2000, NTD 6006 of 2000 and NTD 6010 of 1999 (the earlier native title proceedings).
A consolidated version of the orders made in the earlier native title proceedings is set out in Annexure A. Schedule B
The area covered by the application is: Part A (a) Lots 1 to 9, 47, 56-57, 65 to 74, 80, 87, 97 to 114 (the Part A.1 area); (b) (i) Lots 33, 35 and 37; (ii) the creek named Timber Creek (including its beds and banks); (the Part A.2 area); Part B (c) Lots 16, 22 and 49 (the Part B.1 area); (d) All other land and waters (the Part B.2 area); within the boundaries of the Town of Timber Creek as notified in Northern Territory Government Gazette No. 24 dated 20 June 1975 and depicted on the map referred to in Schedule C.
The Part A area comprises the determination area described in Schedule A to the orders made in the earlier native title proceedings and depicted on the map referred to in Schedule C.
Other than in respect of that part of the application area between the centre line and banks of the Victoria River, the Part B area comprises allotments that are within the outer boundaries of the Part A area, being the numbered lots other than those referred to at 5 and (b) and depicted on the map referred to in Schedule C. Schedule C
A map showing the boundaries of the area covered by the application forms part of Annexure A and is a copy of the map attached to the orders made in the earlier native title proceedings. Schedule D
Copies of searches of official title registers that identify existing or expired non-native title rights and interests in relation to the application area are contained in a volume titled Land and Mining Tenure History comprising exhibit R17 tendered in evidence in the earlier native title proceedings by the Northern Territory, and in respect of which the Applicant seeks its receipt into evidence pursuant to s 86(1)(b) of the Native Title Act.
The nature and extent of non-native title rights and interests in the application area are: (a) in the Part A area, those determined in the earlier native title proceedings to be: (1) rights of access by an employee, servant, agent or instrumentality of the Northern Territory, Commonwealth or other statutory authority as required in the performance of his or her statutory duty; (2) any interest of members of the public to the access and enjoyment (subject to the laws of the Northern Territory and the Commonwealth) of: (i) the waters of the creek named Timber Creek; (ii) beds and banks of creek named Timber Creek; (b) in the Part B.1 area, as far as the Applicant is aware: (1) Lot 16 is covered by a special purpose lease held by the Conservation Land Corporation; (2) Lot 22 is covered by a Crown lease term granted to MR Millwood Pty Ltd; (3) Lot 49 is covered by a public work; and those lots were determined in the earlier native title proceedings to be covered by previous exclusive possession acts under s 23B of the Native Title Act. The Applicant is not in a position to know the full extent of existing or expired non-native title rights and interests in the Part B.2 area in respect of which further searches may be required. Schedule E
The native title rights and interests in relation to the area covered by the application for which compensation is claimed are: (a) Rights in accordance with traditional laws and customs to the possession, occupation, use and enjoyment of the application area to the exclusion of all others. (b) Where the rights and interests referred to at (a) were extinguished by an earlier act, the following non-exclusive rights in accordance with traditional laws and customs: (1) the right to travel over, move about and to have access to the application area; (2) the right to hunt, fish and forage on the application area; (3) the right to gather and to use the natural resources of the application area such as food, medicinal plants, wild tobacco, timber, stone and resin; (4) the right to have access to and use the natural water of the determination area; (5) the right to live on the land, to camp, to erect shelters and other structures; (6) the right to: (i) engage in cultural activities; (ii) conduct ceremonies; (iii) hold meetings; (iv) teach the physical and spiritual attributes of places and areas of importance on or in the land and waters; and (v) participate in cultural practices relating to birth and death, including burial rights; (7) the right to have access to, maintain and protect sites of significance on the application area; (8) the right to share or exchange subsistence and other traditional resources obtained on or from the land or waters (but not for any commercial purposes).
The native title rights and interests referred to at 11 are those determined in the earlier native title proceedings to exist in relation to the Part A.1 area to which s 47B of the Native Title Act applies to require prior extinguishment to be disregarded for the purposes of the native title determination application made in those proceedings.
The native title rights and interests referred to at 11 are those determined in the earlier native title proceedings to exist in relation to Part A.2 area to which s 47B of the Native Title Act does not apply to require prior extinguishment to be disregarded for the purposes of the native title determination application made in those proceedings.
In relation to the whole of the area covered by the application, the native title rights and interests for which compensation is claimed are those referred to at: (a) 11 when not previously extinguished by an earlier act in time; (b) 11 in all other cases where subsisting native title is affected by an act. Schedule F
The Aboriginal/Torres Strait Islander body for the area covered by the application is the Northern Land Council. Schedule G
The native title rights and interests for which compensation is claimed are those specified in Schedule E.
So far as s 62 of the Native Title Act requires, in relation to the Part B area, details of the factual basis on which it is asserted that: (a) the compensation claim group, and the predecessors of those persons, had an association with the area; and (b) there existed traditional laws and customs that gave rise to the claimed native title; and (c) the compensation claim group had continued to hold the native title in accordance with those traditional laws and customs; the Applicant relies upon: (i) the determination made in the earlier native title proceedings with respect to the Part A area; (ii) the circumstance that the Part B area is, other than with respect to a strip of the Victoria River, within the outer boundaries of the Part A area; (iii) the findings and judgments in the earlier native title proceedings and in respect of which the Applicant seeks their adoption pursuant to s 86(1)(c) of the Act. Schedule H
So far as s 62 requires, in relation to Part B area, details of activities in relation to the land and waters that are or were carried on by the compensation claim group, the Applicant relies upon: (a) the determination made in the earlier native title proceedings with respect to the Part A area; (b) the circumstance that the Part B area is, other than with respect to a strip of the Victoria River, within the outer boundaries of the Part A area; (c) the evidence, and findings and judgments, in the earlier native title proceedings, and in respect of which the Applicant seeks their receipt into evidence, and adoption, pursuant to s 86(1)(b) and (c) of the Act. Schedule I
The acts that extinguished or affected native title rights and interests for which compensation is claimed are the:
Copies of searches of official title registers that identify the acts in issue, and existing or expired non-native title rights and interests in relation to the application area, are contained in a volume titled Land and Mining Tenure History comprising exhibit R17 tendered in evidence in the earlier native title proceedings by the Northern Territory, and in respect of which the Applicant seeks its receipt into evidence pursuant to s 86(10)(b) of the Native Title Act.
Some further searches may be required of existing or expired non-native title rights and interests in relation to the Part B.2 area. Schedule J
The provisions of the Native Title Act that deal with the entitlement to compensation are: (a) section 20 in relation to past acts attributable to the Northern Territory; (b) section 22G in relation to intermediate period acts attributable to the Northern Territory; (c) section 23J in relation to previous exclusive possession acts and previous non-exclusive possession acts attributable to the Northern Territory. Schedule K
In relation to the Part A area, a determination of native title was made in the earlier native title proceedings by: (a) orders made by the trial judge on 28 August 2006; (b) orders made by the Full Court on 22 November 2007 and 21 December 2007 varying, in part, the order referred to at (a); (c) orders made by the trial judge on 28 April 2008.
The National Native Title Register maintained under Part 8 of the Native Title Act contains details of the determination.
A consolidated version of the orders made in the earlier native title proceeding is set out in Annexure A. Schedule KA
The Applicant is not aware of any current notifications that have been given under s 24MD(6B)(c) of the Native Title Act and that relate to the application area.
The Applicant is aware that the following notifications had previously been given under s 24MD(6B)(c) of the Native Title Act in relation to the following acts that affected the following parts of the application area: (a) notice of proposed acquisition dated 3 September 1999 in relation to Lot 47; (b) notice of proposed acquisition dated 2 February 2000 in relation to Lot 109; (c) notice of proposed acquisition dated 2 February 2000 in relation to Lots 97 to 100 and 114. Schedule L
The Applicant is unaware of any current notices that have been given under s 29 of the Native Title Act that relate to the application area. Schedule M
The Applicant has not received, and is not entitled under any agreement or award, to compensation because of an act or a related act referred to in Schedule I. Schedule N
The Applicant has not made a request for non-monetary compensation under s 79 of the Native Title Act. If, during negotiations in relation to the application, the Applicant proposes that the whole or part of the compensation should be in a form other than money, the Applicant will then state the nature of the non-monetary compensation claimed. Schedule O
Details of the traditional physical connection with the land and waters covered by the application by members of the compensation claim group are contained in the evidence, findings and judgments in the earlier native title proceedings and in respect of which the Applicant seeks their receipt into evidence, and their adoption, pursuant to s 86(1)(b) and (c) of the Native Title Act. Schedule P
Details of the circumstances in which members of the compensation claim group have been prevented from gaining access to land and waters covered by the application are contained in the evidence, findings and judgments in the earlier native title proceedings and in respect of which the Applicant seeks their receipt into evidence, and their adoption, pursuant to s 86(1)(b) and (c) of the Native Title Act. Schedule Q
There is no other relevant information that the Applicant wants to provide. General law claim
The Applicant, on behalf of the compensation claim group, claims compensation from the Northern Territory under the general law for three invalid future acts and does so in this Application as involving a matter arising under the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) in respect of which the Court has jurisdiction under s 213(2) of that Act and s 39B(1A)(c) of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth). Particulars Acts 50A, 50B and 50C set out in the Table accompanying the Amended Particulars of Act for which Compensation is Claimed dated 17 October 2012. The instruments and records of the acts are documents 43, 44, 45 and 186 of the Tender History Part B filed by the Northern Territory. The matter arises under the Native Title Act by virtue of s 24AA(2) and 24OA of that Act providing that a future act is invalid unless covered by a provision of Pt 2 Div 3 of the Act.
By each of acts 50A, 50B and 50C the Northern Territory granted to itself an interest over Lots 82, 83 and 84, respectively. Particulars The Applicant refers to [34] above.
At the time of acts 50A, 50B and 50C the compensation claim group held in relation to Lots 82, 83 and 34 the native title rights and interest referred to at 11.
By each of acts 50A, 50B and 50C, the compensation claim group has been deprived of the use and enjoyment of the land covered by those acts and has thereby suffered loss and damage.

Griffiths v Northern Territory of Australia

At a glance

Court

Decision date

Before

Catchwords

Source

Catchwords

Judgment (9 paragraphs)

Parties

Legislation Cited (3)

Cases Cited (6)

Cited By (1)