Aboriginal chief seeks Northern Territory mine compensation
[ad_1]
Former Australian of the 12 months Galarrwuy Yunupingu is representing his folks, the Gumatj clan, in a Federal Court docket case searching for as much as $700 million in damages in opposition to an authorised Gove Peninsula mine within the Sixties.
Earlier, he stated the mine was raped by the native Yolngu regardless of their protests.
The Commonwealth argues that indigenous possession comes with situations; particularly that the Commonwealth nonetheless has “radical property rights” to make use of its land even whether it is inconsistent with indigenous possession.
Nitra Kidson KC informed the court docket on Monday that if indigenous and radical property rights had been inconsistent, the Commonwealth might withdraw its recognition and it was at all times susceptible to “beating” by progressive possession.
Kidson argued that the native title was basically acknowledged on the idea that it will not intrude with the institution of colonies, so it was “capitally defensible”.
When requested how essential there’s a level about how indigenous property legislation is run in Australia, Kidson stated: “Definitely, from a compensation perspective, it has big potential.”
Nevertheless, she famous that the Commonwealth can solely train energy within the NT and ACT.
The Commonwealth additionally argues that the 1969 Teori Tau case nonetheless stands, regardless of an assertion that it overturned.
That case reveals that the federal authorities shouldn’t be topic to the “solely provision” rule when it buys property within the NT.
Stephen Lloyd SC, appearing for the Commonwealth, argued that the ultimate choice was not overturned, though a later case stated it was.
“A earlier binding choice of the Excessive Court docket can solely get replaced by one other binding precept,” he stated.
[ad_2]