Barker J
In this decision, Barker J dismissed a claimant application under s 190F(6) of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) (‘NTA’) on the basis that the claim was unregistered and there was no reason why the claim should not otherwise be dismissed. An application for an extension of time to seek review was also dismissed.
On 17 April 2014, Ms Marjorie May Strickland and Ms Anne Joyce Nudding filed a claim under the NTA in respect of land and waters in the Eastern Goldfields region of Western Australia. This application stated it was made on behalf of the descendants of Kitty Bluegum, described as the Maduwongga people. A number of earlier applications over the claim area had either been dismissed, or in one case, withdrawn.
On 10 July 2014, the claim was refused registration because the delegate of the Native Title Registrar found it did not satisfy all the registration conditions of ss 190B and 190C of the NTA. Registration is significant because only registered claimants have the right to negotiate in respect of future acts.
The claimants sought reconsideration of this decision and provided further anthropological evidence. A member of the Native Title Tribunal reconsidered the claim and determined that it should not be accepted for registration because the predecessors of the native title claim group had not been shown to have had an association with the north-west of the claim area. The claimants failed to seek a review of the Tribunal member's decision in the Federal Court within time.
The State filed an application that the claim be dismissed because it was unregistered and there was no reason why it should not be dismissed. The claimants sought an extension of time to seek a review of the Tribunal's decision in the Federal Court.
Justice Barker took into account the claimants explanation for delay, their evidence and submissions about the claim group's association with the area and the Tribunal's decision and concluded, at [185], that the factual bases did not sufficiently support the group's assertions that Maduwongga people in the past had an association with the north-western portion of the claim area.
Taking into accoun the explanation provided in respect of that delay, and particularly taking into account the merits of the proposed substantive application, Barker J did not agree to extend the time for seeking review under s 190F of the NTA.
The claimants acknowledged that if their application to extend the time to seek review failed State’s application to strike out the claimant application should succeed.
In the circumstances the Court dismissed the review application and claimant application.