Wik Peoples V Queensland - The Original Decision

The Original Decision

The Wik peoples lodged their claim on 30 June 1993 in the Federal Court of Australia. The claim was lodged before the commencement of Native Title legislation introduced into Australia following the decision in the Mabo case. The State of Queensland was the first respondent to the claim. The Commonwealth of Australia was the second respondent. At a later stage, the Thayorre People were also joined as respondents. The Thayorre people also cross-claimed because their claim overlapped the claim of the Wik Peoples. The matter came on for hearing before Drummond. Five preliminary questions were posed for determination by the Court. Drummond heard the claim between 17 to 26 October and 14 to 15 December 1994. He delivered his decision 29 January 1996 in Brisbane.

On 29 January 1996 Drummond gave judgment on the five preliminary questions that had been identified. He found that the granting of the leases over the two land claims extinguished any native title rights to those lands. In Drummond’s opinion, each lease gave exclusive possession to the lessees. Drummond did not have to decide whether the Wik people or the Thayorre people actually were the holders of native title rights in respect of the land.

On 22 March 1996 Justice Spender granted the appellants leave to appeal to the Full Court of the Federal Court against the judgment. Subsequent to that grant leave, the High Court made orders that the appeal be removed into the High Court for determination by that court.

Read more about this topic:  Wik Peoples V Queensland

Famous quotes containing the words original and/or decision:

    He had been a lad of whom something was expected. Beyond this all had been chaos. That he would be successful in an original way, or that he would go to the dogs in an original way, seemed equally probable. The only absolute certainty about him was that he would not stand still in the circumstances amid which he was born.
    Thomas Hardy (1840–1928)

    How could a man be satisfied with a decision between such alternatives and under such circumstances? No more than he can be satisfied with his hat, which he’s chosen from among such shapes as the resources of the age offer him, wearing it at best with a resignation which is chiefly supported by comparison.
    George Eliot [Mary Ann (or Marian)