Skip to main content

Wavehill v Northern Territory of Australia [2012] FCA 666; Wavehill v Northern Territory of Australia [2012] FCA 671

Year
2012
Jurisdiction
Northern Territory
Forum
Federal Court
Legislation considered
s 87 Native Title Act 1993 (Cth)
Summary

Lander J

Wavehill v Northern Territory of Australia [2012] FCA 666 and Wavehill v Northern Territory of Australia [2012] FCA 671 were two of eleven cases heard together due to their geographical proximity.

The first consent determination involved an application by the Longreach Birdum estate group over approximately 3169 km² of land and waters within the bounds of the Forrest Hill Pastoral Lease in the Northern Territory. In the second consent determination, the native title rights of the Warrangku, the Karranjini and the Lija/Muwartpi estate groups were recognised over land and waters within the Mungabroom Pastoral Lease. Respondents in both matters were the Territory, Telstra Corporation and two holders of perpetual pastoral leases, Maryfield Station Pty Ltd and Yarabala Pty Ltd. By consent, the Court made a determination in favour of the applicants, under s 87 of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth).

Rights and interests

The following non-exclusive native title rights and interests were recognised in both determinations: the right to access and move about the determination area; hunt and fish on the lands and waters; gather and use natural resources, including water resources (but not water captured by the pastoralists); share and exchange the subsistence and other traditional resources; live, camp and erect shelters; cook and light fires for domestic purposes (but not for clearing vegetation); engage and participate in cultural activities and ceremonies; be accompanied by others; and visit, maintain and protect sites of cultural significance.

In both cases, the Federal Court recognised the interests of Maryfield Station Pty Ltd and Yarabala Pty Ltd under perpetual pastoral leases; the rights of Aboriginal persons pursuant to reservations in the pastoral leases and the rights of the Telstra Corporation. In the first case, the Court also recognised usage rights for the passage of travelling stock and usage rights for commonage purposes.