Supreme Court of New South Wales – Court of Appeal
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
[Home] [Databases] [WorldLII] [Search] [Feedback] Supreme Court of New South Wales – Court of Appeal You are here: AustLII >> Databases >> Supreme Court of New South Wales - Court of Appeal >> 2009 >> [2009] NSWCA 289 [Database Search] [Name Search] [Recent Decisions] [Noteup] [Download] [Help] MINISTER ADMINISTERING THE CROWN LANDS ACT v ILLAWARRA LOCAL ABORIGINAL LAND COUNCIL [2009] NSWCA 289 (11 September 2009) Last Updated: 14 September 2009 NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL!CITATION: !MINISTER ADMINISTERING THE CROWN LANDS ACT v ILLAWARRA LOCAL ABORIGINAL LAND COUNCIL [2009] NSWCA 289!FILE NUMBER(S): !40272/08!HEARING DATE(S): !15 May 2009!JUDGMENT DATE: !11 September 2009!PARTIES: !Minister Administering the Crown Lands Act – Appellant!Illawarra Local Aboriginal Land Council - Respondent!JUDGMENT OF: !Hodgson JA McColl JA Basten JA !LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: !Land & Environment Court!LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S): !LEC 30751/06!LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER: !Sheahan J!LOWER COURT DATE OF DECISION: !6 June 2008!LOWER COURT MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: ![<i>Illawarra Local Aboriginal Land Council v Minister Administering the Crown Lands Act</i>] [2008] NSWLEC 188!COUNSEL: !C E Adamson SC/C Mantziaris – Appellant!J E Griffiths SC/G E Wright - Respondent!SOLICITORS: !Crown Solicitor’s Office – Appellant!Chalk & Fitzgerald Lawyers - Respondent!CATCHWORDS: !ABORIGINALS – land rights under legislation – claim to Crown land – establishment of national park – needed or likely to be needed for public purpose of nature conservation – appropriate level of government to demonstrate need or likely need – whether resolution of dispute at Cabinet level necessary – [<i>Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983</i>] (NSW) s 36(1)!ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – procedural fairness – foreseeable inferences drawn from tendered evidence to support case other than that of tendering party – whether such inferences available in absence of warning to tendering party!APPEALS – statutory appeal from Land and Environment Court – appeal against erroneous decision on a question of law – denial of procedural fairness – whether capable of grounding appeal !EVIDENCE – Aboriginal land claim – permissible use of evidence of events and conduct post-dating claim – whether such events and conduct irrelevant considerations!STATUTORY INTERPRETATION – remedial legislation – principle of beneficial construction – whether adopted impermissibly in treatment of gaps in evidence!WORDS & PHRASES – 'needed or likely to be needed' – 'appropriate level of government' – 'beneficial construction'!LEGISLATION CITED: ![<i>Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983</i>] (NSW), s 36![<i>Government and Related Employees Appeal Tribunal Act 1980</i>] (NSW), s 54![<i>Interpretation Act 1987</i>] (NSW), s 14, 33![<i>Land and Environment Court Act 1979</i>] (NSW), ss 38, 57![<i>National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974</i>] (NSW), s 33!CATEGORY: !Principal judgment!CASES CITED: ![<i>Akora Holdings Pty Ltd v Ljubicic</i>] [2008] NSWCA 339![<i>Batemans Bay Local Aboriginal Land Council v Minister Administering the Crown Lands Act</i>] [2007] NSWLEC 800![<i>Commissioner for Australian Capital Territory Revenue v Alphaone Pty Ltd</i>] [1994] FCA 1074; 49 FCR 576![<i>Director-General, Department of Ageing, Disability and Home Care v Lambert</i>] [2009] NSWCA 102![<i>FAI Insurances Ltd v Winneke</i>] [1982] HCA 26; 151 CLR 342![<i>Haider v JP Morgan Holdings Aust Ltd</i>] [2007] NSWCA 158![<i>Housing Commission v Falconer</i>] (1981) 1 NSWLR 547![<i>Italiano v Carbone</i>] [2005] NSWCA 177![<i>Jerrinja Local Aboriginal Land Council v Minister Administering the Crown Lands Act</i>] [2007] NSWLEC 577; 156 LGERA 65![<i>Malvaso v The Queen</i>] [1989] HCA 58; 168 CLR 227![<i>McCathie v Federal Commissioner of Taxation</i>] [1944] HCA 9; 69 CLR 1![<i>Minister for Aboriginal Affairs v Peko-Wallsend Limited</i>] [1986] HCA 40; (1986) 162 CLR 24![<i>Minister Administering the Crown Lands Act v Bathurst Local Aboriginal Land Council</i>] [2009] NSWCA 138![<i>Minister Administering the Crown Lands Act v Deerubbin Local Aboriginal Land Council</i>] (1998) 43 NSWLR 249 (“[<i>Castlereagh Nature Reserve Land Claim</i>]”)![<i>Minister Administering the Crown Lands Act v Deerubbin Local Aboriginal Land Council (No 2)</i>] [2001] NSWCA 28; 50 NSWLR 665 (“[<i>Maroota Land Claim</i>]”)![<i>Minister Administering the Crown Lands Act v New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council</i>] [2008] HCA 48; 82 ALJR 1505![<i>Minister Administering the Crown Lands Act v New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council</i>] [2009] NSWCA 151![<i>Minister for the Army v Parbury Henty & Company Pty Ltd</i>] [1945] HCA 52; 70 CLR 459![<i>Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Eshetu</i>] [1999] HCA 21; 197 CLR 611![<i>Muin v Refugee Review Tribunal</i>] [2002] HCA 30; 76 ALJR 966![<i>Neal v The Queen</i>] [1982] HCA 55; 149 CLR 305![<i>Parker v Director of Public Prosecutions</i>] (1992) 28 NSWLR 282![<i>Qantas Airways Ltd v Gubbins</i>] (1992) 28 NSWLR 26![<i>Re Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs; Ex parte Miah</i>] [2001] HCA 22; 206 CLR 57![<i>Saville v Health Care Complaints Commission</i>] [2006] NSWCA 298![<i>State Transit Authority of New South Wales v Chemler</i>] [2007] NSWCA 249![<i>South Western Sydney Area Health Service v Edmonds</i>] [2007] NSWCA 16![<i>Sue v Hill</i>] [1999] HCA 30; 199 CLR 462![<i>SZBEL v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs</i>] [2006] HCA 63; 231 ALR 592; 81 ALJR 515![<i>Walker Corporation Pty Ltd v Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority</i>] [2009] NSWCA 178!TEXTS CITED: !DECISION: !(1) Appeal allowed.[<br>][<br>](2) The decision of Sheahan J of the Land and Environment Court dated 6 June 2008 allowing the applicant’s appeal and the final orders made by the Court on 4 September 2008 set aside.[<br>][<br>](3) Respondent to pay the appellant’s costs of the appeal, and to have a certificate under the Suitors’ Fund Act 1951 if otherwise eligible.[<br>][<br>](4) Matter remitted to the Land and Environment Court for decision in accordance with these reasons.!JUDGMENT: !IN THE SUPREME COURT!OF NEW SOUTH WALES!COURT OF APPEAL CA 40272/08 LEC 30751/06 HODGSON JA McCOLL JA BASTEN JA 11 September 2009 MINISTER ADMINISTERING THE CROWN LANDS ACT v ILLAWARRA LOCAL ABORIGINAL LAND COUNCIL Headnote !On 17 January 1986 Budderoo National Park was established south of Sydney and inland of Kiama. Its establishment fulfilled part of a proposal by the National Parks and Wildlife Service to provide a corridor linking existing parks along the Illawarra escarpment, using available Crown land. One of the constraints on the area of the Park as reserved in 1986 had been concern voiced by the Department of Mineral Resources that there might be economically viable coal reserves underlying parts of the escarpment.!On 3 March 1986 a land claim under the Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983 (NSW) was lodged over two portions of land to the north of the newly established park. On 22 June 2006 the Minister rejected the claim, primarily on the basis that they were needed or likely to be needed for the essential public purpose of nature conservation. Small sections of the claimed land were rejected because they comprised freehold land, public roads or were lawfully occupied for mining purposes. !The respondent appealed to the Land and Environment Court against the refusal by the Minister. The area of freehold land having been conceded by the respondent, Sheahan J overturned the decision of the Minister in respect of the remainder of the claimed land, other than land reserved for public roads. The Minister appealed to this Court from the judgment of Sheahan J. !The issues for determination on appeal were: (i) whether the need or likely need must be identified to have been at "an appropriate level of government"; (ii) whether the trial judge correctly identified the use that could be made of evidence as to matters which arose after the lodgement of the claim; (iii) whether, in making use of evidence of post-claim events, the trial judge had denied procedural fairness to the Minister, and (iv) whether the trial judge elevated a finding of delay in determination of the claim into a principle that allowed any gaps in the evidence to be filled favourably to the Land Council.!The Court held, allowing the appeal:!In relation to (i)!(per Hodgson JA, McColl JA agreeing): 1. The trial judge did not address the correct question, namely whether the land was, as a matter of fact, likely to be needed by the executive government for an essential purpose. Rather, his Honour addressed a question distorted by an irrelevant consideration of whether any trajectory towards the existence of such need was itself at the appropriate government level: [39]. Minister Administering the Crown Lands Act v Deerubbin Local Aboriginal Land Council (No 2) [2001] NSWCA 28; (2000) 50 NSWLR 665, considered. Minister for Aboriginal Affairs v Peko-Wallsend Limited [1986] HCA 40; (1986) 162 CLR 24; Saville v Health Care Complaints Commission [2006] NSWCA 298, referred to.!(per Basten JA, dissenting): 2. The political commitment demonstrative of a need or likely need may be required to be discerned at Cabinet level, if the relevant decision is to be made at such level of government. The evidence was capable of supporting a conclusion that, absent the resolution of conflicting departmental positions as to the claimed land by Cabinet, the necessary political commitment did not exist as at the date of the claim: [94] – [100], [106] – [107]. Minister Administering the Crown Lands Act v Deerubbin Local Aboriginal Land Council (No 2) [2001] NSWCA 28; (2000) 50 NSWLR 665, applied. FAI Insurances Ltd v Winneke [1982] HCA 26; 151 CLR 342; Minister Administering the Crown Lands Act v Deerubbin Local Aboriginal Land Council (1998) 43 NSWLR 249; Minister Administering the Crown Lands Act v New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council [2009] NSWCA 151, referred to.