9 September ARELJ - Case Note - Financial Consequences of the Dismissal of a Native Title Claim September 9, 2020 By Sally Parker ARELJ, General, Mining ARELJ, NativeTitle, Mining 0 Matthew Pudovskis Barrister, Francis Burt Chambers Representatives of beneficiaries under a native title land access commercial agreement brought an action for breach of contract in the Supreme Court of Western Australia when the mining company parties to the agreement refused to make a payment owing under the agreement. The companies refused to pay on the basis that the agreement was frustrated or void for uncertainty and therefore unenforceable since the relevant native title claim had been dismissed by the Federal Court of Australia and deregistered. The Supreme Court dismissed the claim and declared that the commercial agreement had been, since the date the native title claim was dismissed and deregistered, terminated for frustration and unenforceable. Member Login Required to Access Case Note Read More Related Articles Submission - DISER Consultation Paper December 2020 ‘Enhancing Australia’s decommissioning framework for offshore oil and gas activities’ ARELJ - Case Note - Yindjibarndi Case “Occupation Requirement” Authority Amendments to Native Title Act give industry stability Recent amendments to both the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) and the Corporations (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander) Act 2006 (Cth) (CATSI Act) are intended to better resolve Native Title claims and provide stability for industry. The Native Title Legislation Amendment Act 2020 addresses the problems caused by the McGlade decision as they relate to ‘right to negotiate’ agreements or section 31 agreements. Submission - Consultation on the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Amendment (Titles Administration and Other Measures) Bill 2021 ARELJ Case Note - Applying the Cautionary Principle to Harvesting Timber in Victoria ARELJ - Case Note - Judgement Clarifies Extent of Non-Conforming Use Protections Showing 0 Comment Comments are closed.