Print this page | ||
Kynuna on behalf of the Bar Barrum People #5 v State of Queensland [2016] FCA 1504 | ||
Binomial Name: | Federal Court of Australia | |
Date: | 5 December 2016 | |
Sub Category: | Consent Determination (Native Title Act) | |
Place: | Tablelands Region, Far North Queensland | |
Click this link to search this location with google maps | ||
State/Country: | Queensland , Australia | |
Click this link to search this location with google maps | ||
The determination area includes land and waters of approximately 71.3462 square kilometres within the Tablelands Region, in the Mareeba Shire Council district of Far North Queensland, approximately 242 kilometres south-south-west of Cairns. The area sits west of the Great Dividing Range, including Lot 10 on HG651, Lot 157 on USL21437, Lot 2 on CP891168, Lot 9 on HG690, Lot 1 on PER4790; PER4789; PER5540, Lot on HG647, Lot 569 on OL58, the part of Lot 1 on AP19246 that sits south and west of a line that begin at the north eastern point of Lot 619 on OL72 and extends in a south east direction to the meeting point of the headwaters of Scrubby Creek and the watershed of the Great Dividing Range; then south-south-west along that watershed to Lot 567 on OL57, and the part of Lot 567 on OL57 (excluding an area covered by QCD2001/007 determination, previously Lots 91 and 100 on USL21437). A map of the Determination Area can be found in the map contained in Schedule 1B which is attached below. | ||
Legal Status: | Registered on the National Native Title Register. | |
Legal Reference: | Federal Court No: QUD6031/2001; National Native Title Tribunal No: QCD2016/015. | |
Alternative Names: | ||
URL: | http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/FCA/2016/1504.html?context=1;query=Bar%20Barrum%20People%20#5;mask_path= | |
Summary Information: | ||
Kynuna on behalf of the Bar Barrum People #5 v State of Queensland [2016] FCA 1504. Between: Tennyson Kynuna and Lynette Burke on behalf of the Bar Barrum People (Applicants) and the State of Queensland, Mareeba Shire Council, Ergon Energy Corporation Limited, Mr Perkes, and Walsh River Respondents (Respondents). Judge: Reeves J. Where made: Queensland. Determination: Native title exists in the entire determination area. It consists of exclusive and non-exclusive native title rights. Native title is held by the Bar Barrum People. The exclusive native title rights and interests over part of the determination area, as described in Part of Schedule 1A of the determination, is:
Non-exclusive native title rights and interests that exist in the determination area, include: In relation to water, the non-exclusive rights (within the exclusive area) for personal, domestic, and non-commercial communal purposes, include:
And in relation to the non-exclusive areas, as described in Part 2 of Schedule 1A of the determination, the non-exclusive rights exist to:
Non-native title interests in the determination area (See Schedule 4, available via URL Link): The nature and extent of other interests that exist in relation to the determination area are listed below, as they exist at the time of determination:
In the case of conflict, the exercise of non-native title rights and interests will prevail over the non-exclusive native title. The Mbabaram Aboriginal Corporation RNTBC, as the prescribed body corporate, is to perform functions required under the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) and to act as agent for the Bar Barrum People. | ||
Detailed Information: | ||
Background: On 28 September 2001, the Bar Barrum People filed an application (#5) for a determination of native title over an area of 71.3462 square kilometres within the Tablelands Region of Far North Queensland. The application could not proceed at the time because it was the subject of a dispute between the Bar Barrum #5 Applicant, and twenty respondent parties known as the 'Walsh River Respondents'. Since 2001, this application has been changed four times. By the time Reeves J determined the claim, the most recent amendment had made Mr Tennyson Kynuna and Ms Lynette Burke the Bar Barrum #5 Applicant on 28 October 2016 [2]. The dispute with the Walsh River Respondents began in 2001 and concerned the requirements of s 225 of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth). The issue was whether any of the 20 Walsh River Respondents' claims could be considered 'a restriction on the use of the land or waters, whether or not annexed to other land or waters', under s 225(c) [3]. Case management continued with a Registrar of the Court. In early November 2016, Reeves J believed the parties had reached an agreement and listed an urgent hearing for 11 November 2016. However, at the hearing the Bar Barrum #5 Applicant indicated that they wished to bring an interlocutory application, pursuant to s 84(8) of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) [7], seeking to dismiss the Walsh River Respondents as respondent parties on the grounds that, if removed, the determination could proceed by consent on 5 December 2016. As a result, the Court granted the interlocutory hearing on 25 November 2016. Between 11 and 25 November 2016, both parties attended further mediation with a member of the National Native Title Tribunal [8]. The mediation was successful and, at the hearing for the interlocutory application on 25 November 2016, the parties indicated that they agreed on the terms of the determination [8]. On that day, the parties provided proposed orders to the Court in the form of an annexure to the agreement. Details of Judgment: As noted above, through mediation, the Bar Barrum #5 Applicant and the Walsh River Respondents reached an agreement about the terms of the determination and a form of orders to provide the appropriate recognition of native title rights and interests held by the Bar Barrum People in the land and waters of the determination area set out in the Bar Barrum #5 Application [8]. The Bar Barrum #5 Applicant, the Walsh River Respondents, and the State of Queensland, all provided written reasons why they believed the proposed determination order was appropriate. Following this, the Court held that several amendments be made [20]. Following these changes, the Court was satisfied that all the conditions set out in s 87 of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) had been met and that it was appropriate to make a determination of native title without a hearing [29]. | ||
Outcomes: | ||
Native Title exists in the entire determination area. |
| ||||
| ||||
|
Was this useful? Click here to fill in the ATNS survey