Skip to main content

Hill on behalf of the Yirendali People Core Country Claim v State of Queensland (No 3) [2015] FCA 777

Year
2015
Jurisdiction
Queensland
Forum
Federal Court
Legislation considered
s 223 Native Title Act 1993 (Cth)
s 87 Native Title Act 1993 (Cth)
Summary

Logan J

In this matter, Logan J ordered that the Yirendali people and the State of Queensland attend, participate and act in good faith and reasonably and genuinely in a mediation of non-native title outcomes with respect to the  Yirendali People's native title claim.

The Yirendali people filed their claim in 2006 for an area of land based around Hughenden and covering land within the Charters Towers regional, Flinders Shire and Richmond Shire local government areas. The history of the claim is available at Hill on behalf of the Yirendali People Core Country Claim v State of Queensland [2015] FCA 300, see related content.

Abuse of Process issue

At an earlier hearing the Yirendali people had effectively admitted they were unable to adduce evidence of connection, a key element of a necessary proof in a determination of native title. Justice Logan noted at [22] that if this was the only question to be resolved, continuing the proceeding would be an abuse of process. However, the pastoralist respondents' had filed a defence claiming there is no native title at all in respect of the claim area. This went beyond a denial of the existence of native title rights and interests claimed by the Yirendali People. Given there were wider issues afoot it was not an abuse of process to keep the case registered.

The Court held it would be inappropriate to proceed to trial given the objects of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth), the willingness of all parties to pursue mediation and at [14] ‘the recollection that, in many cases, an absence of connection can be referrable to events of history which would not be repeated today, when different views are abroad in relation to relations between the original inhabitants of this land and those who have come afterwards.’ 

Logan J noted that initially mediation would be between the applicant and State but the parties would need to have regard to local government, mining and pastoralists interests. Justice Logan reserved the prospect of expanding the mediation to include other respondents.