Justices Moore, North & Mansfield JJ
The Federal Court had previously dismissed part of the appellants' (the Wong-goo-tt-oo (WGTO) native title claimants) native title claim, which had been consolidated with overlapping claims. The Court had found that there was no continuous connection of the WGTO group to the claimed area since sovereignty, but that the members of the group might be native title holders within the groups whose claim areas overlapped (Daniel v State of Western Australia [2003] FCA 666).
In the present claim, the WGTO claimants asserted native title over three areas that were not part of the consolidated claim. The State of WA asked the court to dismiss this application without a hearing, on the basis that the applicants were bringing arguments on which that the court had previously ruled. The doctrine of res judicata (or issue estoppel) in the common law prevents parties from raising an issue that the court has already decided between those parties. The Court agreed with the State and dismissed the claim.
The WGTO appealed. In its decision, the Full Federal Court considered the law regarding abuse of process. At [111] of this appeal, the Court decided: ‘It is our view that, in substance, the WGTO essentially seek to have the same issue as determined in Daniel determined differently in the present WGTO claim. Its attempts to do so constituted, in our opinion, an abuse of process.’ The appeal was dismissed.