Skip to main content

Forster Local Aboriginal Land Council v Attorney-General of New South Wales [2017] FCA 997

Year
2017
Jurisdiction
New South Wales
Forum
Federal Court
Legislation considered
Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983 (NSW)
s 86G Native Title Act 1993 (Cth)
Summary

Griffiths J

In this matter, Griffiths J made an unopposed determination that native title does not exist within the Lot 7055 DP 1186158, situated in the Parish of Forster, County of Gloucester within the State of New South Wales. The respondent parties were New South Wales and NTSCORP.

The applicant, Forster Local Aboriginal Land Council, is the holder of freehold title over land situated on Lakeside Crescent, Elizabeth Beach, which is in the Great Lakes Local Government Area of New South Wales, pursuant to a grant made to it in 2013 under the Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983 (NSW) (ALRA). The applicant wishes to consent to development of an easement by the neighbouring land owner. The purpose of the neighbour’s development application is to construct a road facilitating access to the neighbour’s property through the easement. The neighbour has agreed to pay all costs of the development, including the costs of obtaining the applicant’s consent as owner of the land. Pursuant to s 42 of the ALRA, Aboriginal Land Councils must not deal with land subject to native title rights and interest unless the land is subject to an approved determination of native title.

By consent, the Court made orders in June 2017 that the proceeding would be determined unopposed in accordance with s 86G of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) (NTA) and without holding a hearing. NTSCORP did not oppose orders consistent with the terms sought by the applicant. The Attorney-General was content for the matter to be determined under s 86G and, while not consenting to the application, acknowledged that it was within the power of the Court to make the determination sought by the applicant.

Three affidavits were deposed by members of the Land Council, establishing that the elders and the members of the applicant were satisfied that the land does not have cultural significance to their people, nor are they aware of any other persons who would have any cultural attachment to the land. In April 2017, the Land Council held an extraordinary meeting to consider proposed resolutions relating to land dealings affecting the land. Resolutions were passed at that meeting approving the development application.

Satisfied that the relevant requirements of the NTA had been met, Griffiths J ordered ‘That Lot 7055 DP 1186158 is not subject to any native title rights or interests.’