The evidence
17 In support of the present Application, the applicant and the first respondent relied on an affidavit affirmed by Janet Rosemary Moss on 31 October 2019 and an affidavit affirmed by Mishka Jade Holt on 1 November 2019.
18 Ms Moss is a solicitor employed in the office of the Crown Solicitor of New South Wales and has the carriage of the matter on behalf of the Attorney General, subject to the direction and control of the Crown Solicitor.
19 In her affidavit she deposed to the background to the preceding application and its relationship to the present Application.
20 She referred to and set out Recitals B and C and [3] of the preceding s 87 agreement, as follows:
B. On or around October 2017, the Applicant amended the Application to expressly exclude Lot 1 in DP 620967 and Lot 4 in DP 2L9743.
C. In relation to the land expressly excluded from the Application (described in Recital B), the Applicant intends to lodge a further native title determination application under the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) in relation to those two parcels of land (the "Further Application").
…
3. If the Applicant lodges the Further Application over Lot 1 in DP 620967 and Lot 4 in DP 219743 within six months of the date of the Federal Court hearing for the determination of the Application (that is, by 8 June 2018) or within other such timeframes as agreed, the Respondent Parties:
(a) will accept that there is a credible basis for a determination of native title recognising non-exclusive native title in the land and waters within the external boundaries of the Further Application, such that the Respondent Parties will not require any further connection evidence other than that which was filed or provided in the Application since 2015 (listed in the document annexed to this Agreement and marked Annexure "B") to consent to a further determination that native title exists in favour of the Gumbaynggirr People in relation to the Further Application Area, on the basis that:
(i) the description of the native title claim group is identical to the Application, and
(ii) the nature and extent of the native title rights and interests determined are identical to those determined by the Federal Court in relation to the Application.
(b) will accept occupation for the purposes of sections 47A(1)(c) and 47B(1)(c) of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) in relation to land claimed in the Further Application. If the Applicant identifies any changes relevant to occupation of the Application area prior to the lodgement of the Further Application, then the Applicant is required to provide the Respondent Parties with evidence of occupation for the purposes of sections 47A(l)(c) and 47B(l)(c) of the Native title Act 1993 (Cth).
(c) will not oppose the Further Application on the basis of any estoppel or abuse of process based on the determination of native title made by the Federal Court of Australia in relation to the Application.
21 Ms Moss deposed that the parcels of land described in paragraph 3 of the preceding s 87 agreement comprise the whole of the land and waters the subject of this Application.
22 Ms Moss deposed that on 6 February 2018, Lot 4 in Deposited Plan 219743 became redefined as Lot 1 in Deposited Plan 1238642. Thus, she deposed, the claim area of the preceding application, in its original form, included the land or waters that are the subject of this Application, prior to that application being amended.
23 Ms Moss deposed that the preceding application was amended on 6 November 2017 to give effect to the preceding s 87 agreement.
24 On 8 December 2017, Collier J made orders in relation to the preceding application giving effect to the preceding s 87 agreement determining native title by consent: see Kelly.
25 The approved determination of native title in relation to the preceding application included an order that the Gumbaynggirr Wenonah Head Aboriginal Corporation was to hold the determined native title on trust for the common law holders.
26 Ms Moss deposed that the present Application area was excised from the preceding application towards the end of those proceedings. Accordingly, she continued, the connection material provided by the applicant covered the land and waters subject to these proceedings, and satisfied the Attorney General that it was sufficiently credible that the native title claimants held native title in relation to the Application area before the two parcels within the Application area were excised. Ms Moss deposed that at the time the assessment was done, the Application area was included in the preceding application and therefore covered by the assessment.
27 A summary of the applicant's connection material was set out in another affidavit of Ms Moss affirmed on 13 November 2017 and filed in support of the preceding application, at [74]-[76]. I shall treat that affidavit as being before me on this Application.
28 The process by which the Attorney General considered that the Applicant's connection material was sufficiently credible is detailed in Ms Moss's 13 November 2017 affidavit at [77]-[80] and [113]-[114].
29 I accept that the first respondent's assessment of the applicant's connection material included:
(a) having the applicant's connection evidence and other relevant material reviewed by in-house researchers with post-graduate qualifications in history and anthropology;
(b) obtaining an opinion from counsel as to whether the evidence was sufficient to demonstrate that the Application had a credible basis;
(c) engagement of an external expert anthropologist to undertake a review of the connection material; and
(d) convening a conference of experts in Sydney.
30 I also accept that following this arm's length process, the first respondent was satisfied that the Application had a credible basis sufficient to justify the first respondent consenting to the negotiated resolution of the proceedings and joining with the applicant in asking the Court to make orders in terms of the proposed consent determination.
31 Ms Moss deposed that as the applicant commenced this present Application within a timeframe that was agreed by the parties to the preceding s 87 agreement, and complied with the terms of that agreement, there was no requirement for the Attorney General to reassess the applicant's connection material in order to determine whether it was sufficiently credible. This course was considered to be the most prudent, as well as the quickest, most inexpensive and efficient means of facilitating the just resolution of these proceedings.
32 Ms Moss deposed that the current tenure for the present Application area was as follows:
(a) Lot 1 in Deposited Plan 1238642 is held as an estate in fee simple by Coffs Harbour and District Local Aboriginal Land Council; and
(b) Lot 1 in Deposited Plan 620967 is Crown Land within the meaning of the Crown Land Management Act 2016 (NSW).
The current tenure categories for this Application area are:
(a) land held by Coffs Harbour and District Local Aboriginal Land Council (being Lot 1 in Deposited Plan 1238642); and
(b) Crown Land (being Lot 1 in Deposited Plan 620967).
33 Ms Moss stated that any historical extinguishment of native title on Lot 1 in Deposited Plan 1238642 is to be disregarded under s 47A of the Native Title Act, and that any historical extinguishment of native title on Lot 1 in Deposited Plan 620967 (less that area subject to the saltwater inlet, which is included in the determination of the preceding application) is to be disregarded under s 47B of the Native Title Act.
34 Ms Moss deposed that the outcome that was negotiated between the parties to resolve the preceding application included, in addition to the determination of native title, the execution and registration of the State ILUA and the Aboriginal Land Agreement, as described above at [11]-[12].
35 Ms Moss stated that these agreements, together with the s 87 agreement and proposed consent determination, enable prior extinguishment to be disregarded pursuant to ss 47A and 47B of the Native Title Act and recognise that the Gumbaynggirr People have native title rights and interests in the relevant area.
36 I accept the evidence of Ms Moss.
37 Ms Holt is the Principal Solicitor of NTSCORP Limited, the legal representative of the applicant in the present Application.
38 She deposed to a meeting of members of the Gumbaynggirr People native title claim group convened by NTSCORP on 20 October 2019 at the Valla Beach Tourist Park, at 1 Regatta Drive, Valla Beach, New South Wales. The meeting was convened to consider and make decisions in relation to a number of matters, including:
(a) nominating Gumbaynggirr Wenonah Head Aboriginal Corporation to be the prescribed body corporate to hold the Gumbaynggirr People's native title rights and interests, once determined, in trust; and
(b) authorising the proposed s 87 agreement and consent determination for the Application.
39 Ms Holt deposed to the notification of, preparation for and conduct of the meeting on 20 October 2019, which she attended along with Ms Natalie Rotumah (NTSCORP CEO, also performing the functions of Community Facilitator for this Application), Dr Ken Lum (NTSCORP Manager Research), Dr Nicholas Skilton (NTSCORP Research Historian), and Ms Tessa Sparks (NTSCORP Law Graduate). These staff assisted with the presentations and logistical arrangements at the meeting. Ms Rotumah facilitated the meeting. Ms Holt attended the meeting to provide advice and make presentations.
40 The meeting on 20 October 2019 was attended by approximately 55 Gumbaynggirr People native title claim group members.
41 Ms Holt deposed to the passing of a resolution, by majority, as follows:
The Gumbaynggirr People native title claim group nominates Gumbaynggirr Wenonah Head Aboriginal Corporation RNTBC ICN 7376 to hold the Gumbaynggirr People's native title on trust and, following the determination of their native title, to perform the functions of a Registered Native Title Body Corporate set out in s 57(1) of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) and the Native Title (Prescribed Body Corporate) Regulations 1999 (Cth).
She annexed to her affidavit written confirmation of that decision signed by members of the Gumbaynggirr People native title claim group for the purposes of s 56(2)(i) of the Native Title Act.
42 Ms Holt also deposed to the unanimous passing, at the meeting, of the following resolution:
The Gumbaynggirr People native title claim group authorises the Gumbaynggirr People Applicant to agree to the Court making a determination of native title in respect of Gumbaynggirr People's native title determination application (including the native title consent determination and the section 87 agreement) in the terms reviewed at today's Gumbaynggirr People native title claim group meeting (20 October 2019).
43 Ms Holt deposed also to an Annual General Meeting of members of the Gumbaynggirr Wenonah Head Aboriginal Corporation on the afternoon of 20 October 2019. She was present at that meeting.
44 Ms Holt deposed that on 31 October 2019, following the Annual General Meeting of members, she received correspondence from Gumbaynggirr Wenonah Head Aboriginal Corporation dated 30 October 2019 confirming that it:
(a) accepted the nomination made by the Gumbaynggirr People native title claim group to hold their determined native title in trust for the common law holders pursuant to s 56(3) of the Native Title Act;
(b) consented to be the prescribed body corporate for the purposes of s 57(1) of the Native Title Act; and
(c) consented to perform the functions set out in section 57(1) of the Native Title Act and the Native Title (Prescribed Bodies Corporate) Regulations 1999 (Cth).
45 I accept Ms Holt's evidence.