Reeves J made orders by consent recognising the native title rights and interests of the Imarnte landholding group over the Rainbow Valley Conservation Reserve area comprising 24 square kilometres. The area is located in the drainage of the Hugh River along the northern rim of the James Range and approximately 100km south of Alice Springs. The area was formally held by the Conservation Land Corporation under Crown Lease Perpetual No. 307.
Background
On 28 June 2018, the applicant filed a native title determination over an area of land and waters in Central Australia. That application was filed pursuant to the terms of an Indigenous Land Use Agreement (ILUA) between the Central Land Council and the Northern Territory Government and registered on 3 October 2005. The ILUA provided that an application for native title would only be made where the parties had agreed upon the terms of a consent determination over the area.
During 2011-2018 the parties actively negotiated to reach an agreement regarding the terms of a consent determination. On 22 July 2011, the applicant provided its anthropological report and a sites, estates and dreaming track map. The Northern Territory reviewed that material and shortly reached an agreement on all anthropological issues raised by the applicant. On 27 November 2013, the Northern Territory provided the applicant with a tenure analysis showing the parts of the claim area where it claimed native title had been extinguished. Within a relatively short period, the parties were able to reach an agreement with respect to the parts of the claim area where native title had been supressed or no longer existed. His Honour noted at para [1] his pleasure in seeing the Northern Territory consistently bringing native title matters to a resolution in a timely manner, and the importance of this given senior members of the claim group possibly passing away.
The claim group is comprised of members of three cognatic descent groups, the Braedon, Kenny-Taylor-Briscoe-Forrester and Johnson groups, which are the family groups responsible for the Imarnte estate. The claimants identify as both Imarnte people at the estate level, and as Pertame people at the broader language-group level.
Rights and Interests
The Court recognised the non-exclusive native title rights and interests to access and travel over the land and waters, to live, camp, erect shelters and other structures, hunt, gather and fish, take and use the natural resources, access, take and use natural water on or in the land, light fires for domestic purposes, share or exchange natural resources including traditional items made from the natural resources, access and to maintain and protect sites and places on or in the land and waters that are important under traditional laws and customs, conduct and participate in cultural activities, ceremonies, meetings, cultural practices relating to birth and death, teach the physical and spiritual attributes of sites and place, make decisions about the use and enjoyment of the land and waters by Aboriginal people who recognise themselves to be governed by the traditional laws and customs acknowledged by the native title holders, and to be accompanied on the land and waters.
His Honour noted at para [16] that the native title rights and interests recognised were not inconsistent with the interests of the Conservation Land Corporation under the Crown Lease Perpetual No. 307. Reeves J stated at para [17] that to the extent that the continued existence, enjoyment or exercise of the native title rights and interests are inconsistent with the interests outlined in para [14], these other interests would prevail over, but do not extinguish, the native title rights and interests.
The Court concluded that native title did not exist in the areas described in Schedule C.
Reeves J also concluded that native title had been wholly extinguished in the areas of the determination area covered by public works (defined in s253 NTA) constructed or established before 23 December 1996, and the areas covered by certain public works.
Prescribed Body Corporate
The Court held that the native title was not to be held on trust and that the Wura Aboriginal Corporation was to be the prescribed body corporate in accordance with s 57(2) NTA, and it was to perform the functions found in s 57(3) NTA after becoming a registered native title body corporate.