[1] Mabo v Queensland [No 2] (1992) 175 CLR 1. [Hereinafter Mabo]
[2] See for example, MA Stephenson and Suri Ratnapala (ed), Mabo: A Judicial Revolution (University of Queensland Press, 1993); Robert Van Kreiken, "from Milirrpum to Mabo: the High Court, terra nullius and moral entrepreneurship" (2000) 23 NSWLJ 63-77; Stephanie Fryer-Smith, "Indian Giving? Native Title Rights in the 1990s" (1999) 1 Legal Issues in Business 5-11.
[3] Jeremy Webber, "The Jurisprudence of Regret: The Search for Standards of Justice in Mabo" (1995) 17 Sydney Law Review 5.
[4] Webber, "Beyond Regret: Mabo's Implications For Australian Constitutionalism" in Duncan Ivison, Paul Patton and Will Sanders, Political Theory and the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (Cambridge, 2000) at 60.
[5] Andrew Lokan, "From Recognition to Reconciliation: The Functions of Aboriginal Rights Law" (1999) 23 Melbourne University Law Review 65, 67.
[6] Ward v Western Australia [2002] HCA 28, 8 August 2002. [Hereinafter Ward]
[7] Ward v Western Australia (1998) 159 ALR 483, per Lee J at 639.
[8] This taken from Jeremy Webber's companion piece, "Beyond Regret: Mabo's Implications for Australian Constitutionalism" in Duncan Ivison, Paul Patton and Will Sanders, Political Theory and the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (Cambridge, 2000) 60 - 88.
[9] This is so despite Brennan J's assessment in Mabo that the common law is not responsible. "It is appropriate to identify the events which resulted in the dispossession of the indigenous inhabitants of Australia, in order to dispel the misconception that it is the common law rather than the action of governments which made many of the indigenous people of this country trespassers on their own land." Mabo, per Brennan J at 69.
[10] Wik Peoples v Queensland (1996) 187 CLR 1, per Gummow J at 179, [hereinafter Wik].
[11] Ibid per Gummow J at 179.
[12] Jacques Derrida, "Force of Law: The 'Mystical Foundations of Authority" in Rosenfeld and Carlson (eds) Deconstruction and the Possibility of Justice (Routledge, New York, 1992) at 14.
[13] Thomas Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2nd ed, [University of Chicago Press, 1970].
[14] Ibid at 175. Note that in the postscript to the second edition, Kuhn proffers a second definition for paradigm.
[15] Derrida, "Force of Law", above n 12.
[16] Mabo v Queensland [No 2] (1992) 175 CLR 1, per Brennan J at 29 "Although our law is the prisoner of its history, it is not now bound by decisions of courts in the hierarchy of an Empire then concerned with the development of its colonies.".
[17] Mabo v Queensland [No 2] (1992) 175 CLR 1, per Brennan J at 29.
[18] Ibid at 30, 45.
[19] Ibid at 29.
[20] Mabo v Queensland [No 2] (1992) 175 CLR 1 per Brennan J at 45; Wik Peoples v Queensland (1996) 187 CLR 1, per Brennan CJ at 95.
[21] Mabo v Queensland [No 2] (1992) 175 CLR 1 per Brennan J at 30.
[22] Ibid.
[23] Western Australia v Ward (2000) 99 FCR 316, [805] - [820].
[24] Ibid, per North J at [820].
[25] Wik Peoples v Queensland (1996) 187 CLR 1, per Gummow J at 179-180. See also Gummow J discussion of the development of the law in Essanda Finance Corporation Ltd v Peat Marwick Hungerfords (1997) 188 CLR 241 at 298.
[26] McHugh, 'Judicial Method' (1999) 73 Australian Law Journal 37.
[27] McHugh, "The Law-Making Function of the Judicial Process - Part II" (1998) 62 ALJ 116, at 124, in Fiona Wheeler, "Common law native title in Australia : an analysis of Mabo v Queensland (No 2)" (1993) 21 Federal Law Review 271 at 278.
[28] Mabo v Queensland [No 2] (1992) 175 CLR 1 per Brennan J at 45-48; per Deane and Gaudron JJ at 95; per Toohey J at 182-183.
[29] Ibid.
[30] Mabo v Queensland [No 2] (1992) 175 CLR 1 per Brennan J at 58 - 63.
[31] Mabo v Queensland [No 2] (1992) 175 CLR 1 per Brennan J at 68-69.
[32] Ibid, per Brennan J at 63-71, Deane and Gaudron JJ at 112-113.
[33] Ibid at 42.
[34] Milirrpum v Nabalco Pty Ltd (1971) 17 FLR 141. For an elaboration on this point see Paul Patton, "The translation of indigenous land into property: the mere analogy of English jurisprudence", Paralax, 2000, vol. 6, no. 1, 25 - 38.
[35] MA Stephenson and Suri Ratnapala, Mabo: A Judicial Revolution (1993); Robert van Krieken, "From Milirrpum to Mabo: The High Court, terra Nullius and Moral Entrepreneurship" (2000) 23 NSWLJ 63-77.
[36] See for example, Murray Goot and Tim Rowse (ed.), Make a Better Offer: The Politics of Mabo (Pluto Press, 1994).
[37] See for example, Michael Detmold, "Law and Difference: Reflections on Mabo's case" (1995) 17 Sydney Law Review 159, Stewart Motha, Mabo: Encountering the Epistemic limit of the Recognition of Difference" (1998) 7 Griffith Law Review 79; Ian Hunter, "Native Title: Acts of State and the Rule of Law" in Goot and Rowse(eds) Make a Better Offer (Pluto Press, 1994); Christopher Boge, "A Fatal Collision at the Intersection? The Australian Common Law and Traditional Aboriginal Land Rights" in Boge (ed) Justice For All? (Lawyers Books Publications, 2001).
[38] Mabo v Queensland [No 2] (1992) 175 CLR 1, per Toohey J at 183.
[39] Webber, "The Jurisprudence of Regret: The Search for Standards of Justice in Mabo" (1995) 17 Sydney Law Review 5 at 21-22.
[40] Cooper v Stuart (1889) 14 App Cas 286.
[41] Mabo v Queensland [No 2] (1992) 175 CLR 1, per Deane and Gaudron JJ at 104. The four cases are Attorney-General v Brown (1847) 1 Legge 312; Cooper v Stuart (1889) 14 App Cas 286; Council of the Municipality of Randwick v Rutledge and Others (1959) 102 CLR 54; Williams v Attorney-General for NSW (1913) 16 CLR 404.
[42] Mabo v Queensland [No 2] (1992) 175 CLR 1, per Brennan J at 41; Deane and Gaudron JJ at 109.
[43] Richard Bartlett, The Mabo Decision (Butterworths, 1993), ix; David Ritter, '"The Rejection of Terra Nullius" in Mabo: A Critical Analysis' (1996) 18 Sydney Law Review 5 at 6; Robert van Krieken, "From Milirrpum to Mabo: The High Court, terra Nullius and Moral Entrepreneurship" (2000) 23 NSWLJ 63 at 69-73.
[44] Mabo v Queensland [No 2] (1992) 175 CLR 1, per Brennan J at 41-42, 57-58.
[45] Ibid, per Brennan J at 42; Deane and Gaudron JJ at 109.
[46] Michael Detmold, "Law and Difference: Reflections on Mabo's case" (1995) 17 Sydney Law Review 159; Jeremy Webber, "The Jurisprudence of Regret: the Search for Standards of Justice in Mabo" (1995) 15 Sydney Law Review 5.
[47] Mabo v Queensland [No 2] (1992) 175 CLR 1, per Brennan J at 61.
[48] Ibid, per Deane and Gaudron JJ at 111-113; Toohey J at 192-204.
[49] Wik Peoples v Queensland (1996) 187 CLR 1, per Gummow J at 180.
[50] Ibid, per Gummow J at 182.
[51] McHugh, "Judicial Method" (1999) 73 Australian Law Journal 37 at 40.
[52] R v L (1991) 174 CLR 379.
[53] Mabo v Queensland [No 2] (1992) 175 CLR 1, per Brennan J at 29.
[54] Ward v Western Australia [2002] HCA 28 per Gleeson CJ, Gaudron, Gummow and Hayne JJ at [16], Fejo v Northern Territory (1998) 195 CLR 96, per Gleeson CJ, Gaudron, McHugh, Gummow, Hayne and Callinan JJ at 119-121.
[55] Fejo v Northern Territory (1998) 195 CLR 96, per Gleeson CJ, Gaudron, McHugh, Gummow, Hayne and Callinan JJ at 120-121.
[56] Mabo v Queensland [No 2] (1992) 175 CLR 1, per Brennan J at 58.
[57] Ward v Western Australia [2002] HCA 28 at [21].
[58] Compare Beaumont CJ and Von Doussa J in the Full Federal Court in Ward with North J in dissent in the Full Court (Western Australia v Ward (2000) 99 FCR 316), and Lee J at first instance (Ward v Western Australia (1998) 159 ALR 483).
[59] Ward v Western Australia [2002] HCA 28 at [82]
[60] The Age, 28 August 2002, <http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/08/27/1030053058615.html> at 18 November 2002.
[61] 'Native title holder' is used in ss17 - 24KA, except for s24EB which uses 'common law holder'. 'Common law holder is used in s56 in describing the steps to determination. Finally at s60AA, in discussing the role of 'body corporates' in the claim of the Merriam people, which was determined prior to the passing of the Native Title Act 1993, the holders of native title are described as 'native title holders' when they are also unquestionably 'common law holders'. This confirms the equivalence of the two terms.
[62] It was held in Western Australia v The Commonwealth (Native Title Act Case) (1995) 183 CLR 373 that the Native Title Act relied for its validity on s51(xxvi). There is also the possibility of a challenge to the NTA under s51(xxxi) of the Constitution if the Native Title Act has the affect of taking away property rights conferred by the common law without compensation. On the interpretation of s51(xxxi) see,
[63] See for an analysis of the limits Kirby J and Gaudron J place on the scope of legislative power under the race power: Alexander Reilly, "Reading the Race Power: A Hermeneutic Analysis" (1999) 23 Melbourne University Law Review 476; George Williams, Stephen Gaegler and Geoff Lindell, "October Symposium: The Races Power" (1998) 9 Public Law Review 265.
[64] Ward v Western Australia [2002] HCA 28 at [95].
[65] Mabo v Queensland [No 2] (1992) 175 CLR 1, per Brennan J at 31-32, per Deane and Gaudron JJ at 95. If it had not already been established in earlier cases, Mabo made it clear that claims of Indigenous sovereignty could only be asserted in the realm of politics. For an analysis of the impact of sovereignty on native title, see Ian Hunter, "Native title: acts of state and the rule of law" in Goot and Rowse (ed.), Make a Better Offer, above n 36.
[66] Mabo v Queensland [No 2] (1992) 175 CLR 1, per Brennan J at 59, "Native title, though recognised by the common law, is not an institution of the common law and is not alienable by the common law."
[67] For an analysis in these terms, see Gummow J in Wik at 180.
[68] Mabo per Brennan at 45.
[69] Ibid at 47.
[70] Ibid at 69.
[71] Wik, per Brennan CJ at 84. See also, Western Australia v Commonwealth (Native Title Act case) (1995) 183 CLR 373 at 439, per Mason CJ, Brennan, Deane, Toohey, Gaudron and McHugh JJ.: "Native title can be extinguished or impaired by a valid exercise of sovereign power inconsistent with the continued enjoyment or unimpaired enjoyment of native title".
[72] Wik, per Brennan J at 84, Dawson at 122, Gaudron at 135-136, Gummow J at 176, Kirby J at 238-239.
[73] Ward v Western Australia [2002] HCA 28, per Gleeson CJ, Gaudron, Gummow and Hayne JJ at [234].
[74] Ibid at [91].
[75] Ibid at [84] - [90].
[76] Ibid at [233].
[77] Ibid at [197]-[261]. The Court held that the designation of a reserve does not extinguish native title. [221] The reservation of land for public purposes extinguishes native title rights to determine future uses of land, but not existing native title rights.[219] The vesting of reserve land in a statutory authority or in others under the Land Act 1933 (WA) extinguishes native title subject to the Native Title Act.[229]-[244]
[78] Mabo, per Deane and Gaudron JJ at 112.
[79] Ibid at 112.
[80] Ibid.
[81] Wik, per Kirby J at 233.
[82] Fejo v Northern Territory (1998) 195 CLR 96 at 151 [105].
[83] Fejo (1998) 195 CLR 96 at 151 [105].
[84] Yanner v Eaton (1999) 201 CLR 351 at 408-409 [152]-[153].
[85] Native Title Act Case (1995) 183 CLR 373 at 452.
[86] Wilson v Anderson [2002] HCA 29 at [138].
[87] Ward per Gleeson CJ, Gaudron, Gummow and Hayne JJ at [91]; McHugh J at [561]; per Callinan J at [969].
[88] Ward per Gleeson CJ, Gaudron, Gummow and Hayne JJ at [91].
[89] Lee J at (1998) 159 ALR 483 at 576; Full Court (2000) 99 FCR 316 at 419-420 [391].
[90] Mabo, per Brennan J at 32.
[91] Lisa Strelein, "Conceptualising Native Title" (2001) 23 Sydney Law Review 95 at 122.
[92] Wik per Brennan CJ at 84.
[93] Mabo at 113.
[94] Mabo, per Toohey J at 199 - 205.
[95] Fejo at [43] per Gleeson CJ, Gaudron, McHugh, Gummow, Hayne and Callinan JJ.
[96] Fejo at [43] per Gleeson CJ, Gaudron, McHugh, Gummow, Hayne and Callinan JJ.
[97] Mabo at 187.
[98] Ward v Western Australia (1998)159 ALR 483 at 508.
[99] Western Australia v Ward (2000) 170 ALR 159 at [826].
[100] Western Australia v Ward (2000) 170 ALR 159 at [90] - [91].
[101] Western Australia v Ward (2000) 170 ALR 159 at [96].
[102] Katy Barnett, " Case notes : one step forward and two steps back : native title and the bundle of rights analysis" (2000) 24 Melbourne University Law Review 462.
[103] Ward [91].
[104] Ward [84].
[105] See, among others who have used this concept to explain native title, Noel Pearson, 'The Concept of Native Title at Common Law' in G Yunupingu (ed), Our Land is Our Life: Land Rights - Past, Present and Future (1997); Christos Mantziaris and David Martin, Native Title Corporations, A legal and anthropological analysis (2000) at 9; Lisa Strelein, 'Conceptualising Native Title' (2001) 23 Sydney Law Review 95.
[106] Fejo at [100].
[107] Wik at 182.
[108] Fejo at [54]. [Emphasis added.]
[109] Fejo at [54]. [Emphasis added.]
[110] Fejo at [101] - [102].
[111] Fejo at [102].
[112] Fejo at [103]. [Emphasis added.]
[113] See for a discussion of British colonisation in North America, Robert Williams Jr., The American Indian in Western Legal Thought (Oxford University Press, 1990) . Compare with Marcus-Clark, A History of Australia, vol 1 (Melbourne University Press, 1999); Henry Reynolds, Frontier: Aborigines, Settlers and Land (Sydney, Allen & Unwin, 1987).
[114] Jeremy Webber, "The Jurisprudence of Regret: The Search for Standards of Justice in Mabo" (1995) 17 Sydney Law Review 5 at 22.
[115] Ibid at 22.
[116] (1993) 104 DLR (4th) 470 at 670-672.
[117] Western Australia v Ward (2000) 99 FCR 316, per Beaumont CJ and von Doussa J at [93].
[118] Ward, per Gleeson CJ, Gaudron, Gummow and Hayne JJ at [80].
[119] Ward, per Callinan J at [626]. See also, Gleeson CJ, Gaudron, Gummow and Hayne JJ at [74] - [80].
[120] Mabo, per Deane and Gaudron at 110; Toohey at 188.
[121] Mabo, per Toohey at 188.
[122] Mabo, per Toohey at 207 - 209.
[123] See for example, Calder [1973] SCR 313, per Hall J at 368, Judson J at 328; Delgamuuk [1997] 3 SCR 1010, per Lamer CJ at 1082. For a general discussion of 'possession' as the basis of title see Andrew Lokan, "From Recognition to Reconciliation: The Functions of Aboriginal Rights Law" (1999) 23 Melbourne University Law Review 65 at 71-79; Kent McNeil, Common Law Aboriginal Title (1989).
[124] Yanner v Eaton (1999) 201 CLR 351 at [17] - [19].
[125] Gray and Gray, "The Idea of Property" in Susan Bright and John Dewar, Land Law: Themes and Perspectives (Oxford University Press, 1998), 18 -19.
[126] Mabo, per Toohey at 209. (references omitted.)
[127] Fejo, per Gleeson CJ, Gaudron, McHugh, Gummow, Hayne and Callinan JJ at [58].
[128] Yorta Yorta Aboriginal Community v Victoria (Federal Court of Australia, Olney J, 18 December 1998, unreported); [1998] FCA 1606 at [22].
[129] Simon Young, "The trouble with 'tradition': Native Title and the Yorta Yorta decision" (2001) 30 University of Western Australia Law Review 28-50; Alexander Reilly, "The Ghost of Truganini: Use of Historical Evidence as Proof of Native Title" (2000) 28 Federal Law Review 453; Roderic Pitty, "A Poverty of Evidence: abusing law and history in Yorta Yorta v Victoria (1998) (1999) 5 Australian Journal of Legal History 41-61; James Cockayne, "Indigenous and colonial traditions in native title: Members of the Yorta Yorta Aboriginal Community v Victoria (2001) 25 Melbourne University Law Review 786-809.
[130] Yorta Yorta v Victoria (2001) 110 FCR 244, per Branson and Katz JJ, with Black CJ dissenting; Members of the Yorta Yorta Aboriginal Community v Victoria [2002 HCA 58 (12 December 2002) per Gleeson CJ, Gummow and Hayne JJ, HcHugh J and Callinan J, with Kirby J and Gaudron J dissenting.
[131] Wik, per Brennan CJ at 88.
[132] See for a description of Canadian jurisprudence on this issue, Andrew Lokan, "From Recognition to Reconciliation: The Functions of Aboriginal Rights Law" (1999) 23 Melbourne University Law Review 65 at 94-95.
[133] Peter Butt, Land Law (2nd Ed, 1988) at 582.
[134] Mabo per Brennan J at 51.
[135] Mabo per Brennan at 68-69. See also Brennan J at 57-58; Deane and Gaudron JJ at 104.
[136] There are limits to possessory title at common law which would have to be overcome for it to apply to the situation of native title holders. Most significantly, it is not possible to claim a title in adverse possession on vacant Crown land. There is a strong argument that given that native title pre-existed the Crown, this limitation ought not to apply to native title.
[137] Lisa Strelein, "Conceptualising Native Title" (2001) 23 Sydney Law Review 95 at 115.
[138] Ibid at 113.
[139] Wik at 182.
[140] Webber, "Beyond Regret: Mabo's Implications For Australian Constitutionalism" in Duncan Ivison, Paul Patton and Will Sanders, Political Theory and the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (Cambridge, 2000) at 61.
[141] Ibid at 63.
[142] There have been 31 successful claims to date out of a total of 1527 applications. Of these, 26 were 'Consent' determinations, 10 were litigated determinations and 9 were unopposed. <http://www.nntt.gov.au/applications/determinations.html> at 18 November 2002.
[143] Yorta Yorta Aboriginal Community v Victoria (Federal Court of Australia, Olney J, 18 December 1998, unreported); [1998] FCA 1606. For an analysis of Yorta Yorta see references above n116.
[144] Ward, per McHugh at [561].
[145] Ibid.
[146] Webber, "The Jurisprudence of Regret" above n3 at 27.
[147] Ibid at 28.
[148]
Ward at [565].
[149] Ward at [561].