Commonwealth v Yarmirr | |
---|---|
Court | High Court of Australia |
Full case name | Commonwealth of Australia v Yarmirr |
Decided | 11 October 2001 |
Citation(s) | [2001] HCA 56, (2001) 208 CLR 1 |
Case history | |
Prior action(s) | Yarmirr v Northern Territory [No 2] [1998] FCA 771, (1998) 82 FCR 533, Federal Court Commonwealth of Australia v Yarmirr [1999] FCA 1668, (1999) 101 FCR 171, Federal Court (Full Court) |
Court membership | |
Judge(s) sitting | Gleeson CJ, Gaudron, McHugh, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne and Callinan JJ |
Yarmirr v Northern Territory was an Australian court case, decided in 2001. It was an application for the determination of native title to seas, sea-bed and sub-soil, over an area in the Northern Territory, ultimately determined on appeal to the High Court of Australia.
The application was made by Mary Yarmirr and others on behalf of a number of different clan groups of Aboriginal people to an area of seas and sea-beds surrounding Croker Island in the Northern Territory of Australia. The native title rights and interests claimed included the right to exclusive possession. [1] [2]
The case established that traditional owners do have native title of the sea and sea-bed; however, common law rights of fishing and navigation mean that only non-exclusive native title can exist over the sea. [1]
The case aimed to determine, under Territorial application of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth): [1]
The trial judge, Olney J, determined members of the Croker Island community have a non-exclusive native title right to have free access to the sea and sea-bed of the claimed area for all or any of the following purposes: [1]
The claimed area was defined by maps attached to the application for determination. It included the seas and extended to land or reefs within the proposed boundaries. Native title of Croker Island and other islands within the claimed area had been granted in 1980 and were not within the claim. [4]
Both the Commonwealth and the claimants appealed the original determination. A full court of the Federal Court, by a majority, Beaumont and von Doussa JJ, dismissed both appeals. Merkel would have dismissed the appeal by the Commonwealth, allowed the appeal by the claimants and remitted the matter back to the trial judge for further hearing. [5]
Both the Commonwealth and the claimants appealed to the High Court, which upheld the Commonwealths' appeal and dismissed claimants' appeal. The determination was thus amended so as to be restricted to and apply to the internal waters of the Northern Territory, including the inter-tidal zone both of the mainland and of the islands within the claimed area. [1]
The claimants were ordered to pay the costs of both the claimants' and the Commonwealth's appeals. [1]
In law, standing or locus standi is a condition that a party seeking a legal remedy must show they have, by demonstrating to the court, sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged to support that party's participation in the case. A party has standing in the following situations:
The Australian Antarctic Territory (AAT) is a part of East Antarctica claimed by Australia as an external territory. It is administered by the Australian Antarctic Division, an agency of the federal Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water. The territory's history dates to a claim on Enderby Land made by the United Kingdom in 1841, which was subsequently expanded and eventually transferred to Australia in 1933. It is the largest territory of Antarctica claimed by any nation by area. In 1961, the Antarctic Treaty came into force. Article 4 deals with territorial claims, and although it does not renounce or diminish any pre-existing claims to sovereignty, it also does not prejudice the position of Contracting Parties in their recognition or non-recognition of territorial sovereignty. As a result, only four other countries — New Zealand, the United Kingdom, France, and Norway — recognise Australia's claim to sovereignty in Antarctica.
Native title refers to rights, recognised by Australian law, held by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander groups or individuals to land that derive from their maintenance of their traditional laws and customs. These Aboriginal title rights were first recognised as a part of Australian common law with the decision of Mabo v Queensland in 1992. The doctrine was subsequently implemented and modified via statute with the Native Title Act 1993.
The second question of the 1967 Australian referendum of 27 May 1967, called by the Holt government, related to Indigenous Australians. Voters were asked whether to give the Commonwealth Parliament the power to make special laws for Indigenous Australians in states, and whether Indigenous Australians should be included in official population counts for constitutional purposes. The term "the Aboriginal Race" was used in the question.
Croker Island is an island in the Arafura Sea off the coast of the Northern Territory, Australia, 250 km (160 mi) northeast of Darwin. It was the site of the Croker Island Mission between 1940 and 1968.
The judiciary of Australia comprises judges who sit in federal courts and courts of the States and Territories of Australia. The High Court of Australia sits at the apex of the Australian court hierarchy as the ultimate court of appeal on matters of both federal and State law.
Section 51(xxxi) is a subclause of section 51 of the Constitution of Australia. It empowers the Commonwealth to make laws regarding the acquisition of property, but stipulates that such acquisitions must be on just (fair) terms. The terms is sometimes referred to in shorthand as the 'just terms' provision.
Australian administrative law defines the extent of the powers and responsibilities held by administrative agencies of Australian governments. It is basically a common law system, with an increasing statutory overlay that has shifted its focus toward codified judicial review and to tribunals with extensive jurisdiction.
Milirrpum v Nabalco Pty Ltd, also known as the Gove land rights case because its subject was land known as the Gove Peninsula in the Northern Territory, was the first litigation on native title in Australia, and the first significant legal case for Aboriginal land rights in Australia, decided on 27 April 1971.
The Supreme Court of Norfolk Island is the superior court for the Australian territory of Norfolk Island. It has unlimited jurisdiction within the territory in civil matters and hears the most serious criminal matters. It also has jurisdiction over the Coral Sea Islands Territory. All matters are heard before a single judge, including appeals from the Court of Petty Sessions. In the Australian court hierarchy, it is one of eight state and territory Supreme Courts having unlimited jurisdiction in their respective parts of Australia. Appeal lies to the Federal Court of Australia, from which an appeal by special leave can be made to the High Court of Australia.
The Federal Court of Australia is an Australian superior court which has jurisdiction to deal with most civil disputes governed by federal law, along with some summary and indictable criminal matters. Cases are heard at first instance mostly by single judges. In cases of importance, a Full Court comprising three judges can be convened upon determination by the Chief Justice. The Court also has appellate jurisdiction, which is mostly exercised by a Full Court comprising three judges, the only avenue of appeal from which lies to the High Court of Australia. In the Australian court hierarchy, the Federal Court occupies a position equivalent to the supreme courts of each of the states and territories. In relation to the other courts in the federal stream, it is superior to the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia for all jurisdictions except family law. It was established in 1976 by the Federal Court of Australia Act.
The Native Title Act 1993(Cth) is a law passed by the Australian Parliament, the purpose of which is "to provide a national system for the recognition and protection of native title and for its co-existence with the national land management system". The Act was passed by the Keating government following the High Court's decision in Mabo v Queensland (No 2) (1992). The Act commenced operation on 1 January 1994.
The Western Desert cultural bloc is a cultural region in central Australia covering about 600,000 square kilometres (230,000 sq mi), used to describe a group of linguistically and culturally similar Aboriginal Australian nations.
Aboriginal title is a common law doctrine that the land rights of indigenous peoples to customary tenure persist after the assumption of sovereignty to that land by another colonising state. The requirements of proof for the recognition of aboriginal title, the content of aboriginal title, the methods of extinguishing aboriginal title, and the availability of compensation in the case of extinguishment vary significantly by jurisdiction. Nearly all jurisdictions are in agreement that aboriginal title is inalienable, and that it may be held either individually or collectively.
The Supreme Court of Christmas Island was the highest court for Christmas Island, an external territory of Australia. The court was originally established in 1958 after sovereignty over the island was transferred from the United Kingdom to Australia. The court had jurisdiction to deal with all serious crimes and major civil claims for damages occurring on the island. The court was abolished on 10 May 2002.
A Registered Native Title Body Corporate (RNTBC) is a corporation nominated by a group of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander people for the purposes of native title in Australia, to represent their native title rights and interests, once that group's native title application has been recognised in a Federal Court of Australia determination, and the corporate body registered. The corporation nominated hold and manage or manage before native title determination and registration, is called a Prescribed Body Corporate (PBC).
The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1984(Cth), is an Act passed by the Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia to enable the Commonwealth Government to intervene and, where necessary, preserve and protect areas and objects of particular significance to Australia's Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander peoples from being desecrated or injured.
Akiba on behalf of the Torres Strait Regional Seas Claim Group v Commonwealth of Australia [2013] HCA 33; 250 CLR 209 is a landmark Australian judgment of the High Court. The matter related to Native title rights, their extension to other persons and their extinguishment by Statute.
Debra Sue Mortimer is an Australian judge who has been the Chief Justice of the Federal Court of Australia since 7 April 2023. She was born in New Zealand but has practised law in Australia. She has been a judge of the Federal Court of Australia since 2013, having previously been a Senior Counsel practising at the Victorian Bar in migration law, environmental law and anti-discrimination law.
Northern Territory v Mr A. Griffiths (deceased) and Lorraine Jones on behalf of the Ngaliwurru and Nungali Peoples [2019] HCA 7 is an Australian native title court case that was heard in the High Court of Australia. This case was an appeal by the Northern Territory and the Commonwealth of Australia of the decision handed down by the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia in Northern Territory of Australia v Griffiths [2017] FCAFC 106. The High Court of Australia ruled to reduce the amount of compensation awarded to the Ngaliwurru People and the Nungali People by the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia. This compensation had been granted to the Ngaliwurru and Nungali Peoples as a remedy for deeds taken by the Northern Territory Government that were previously established by the judicial system to have extinguished native title. The total amount of compensation awarded was reduced from $2,899,446 to $2,530,350. This compensation had been awarded for the monetary and non-monetary loss, as well as interest, associated with the extinguishment of native title. The decision made by the High Court meant the appeals made by the Northern Territory and the Commonwealth were "allowed in part". The case of Northern Territory v Mr Griffiths and Lorraine Jones has been labelled one of the most significant native title court cases since Mabo v Queensland and Mabo v Queensland. The Ngaliwurru and Nungali Peoples reside in Timber Creek, Northern Territory. The High Court granted special leave for the appeal on 16 February 2018. The High Court, which is situated in Canberra, had not heard a case in the Northern Territory prior to this.