Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback Australian Indigenous Law Reporter

Editors --- "Bateman's Bay Local Aboriginal Land Council v The Aboriginal Community Benefit Fund Pty Limited - Case Summary" [1999] AUIndigLawRpr 28; (1999) 4(3) Australian Indigenous Law Reporter 19

Bateman's Bay Local Aboriginal Land Council v The Aboriginal Community Benefit Fund Pty Limited

High Court of Australia

Gaudron, McHugh, Gummow, Kirby and Hayne JJ

6 August 1998

[1998] HCA 49

Administrative law - standing to seek injunction to restrain a statutory authority, with access to public monies, from acting outside its statutory powers - whether considerations of commercial competition provide applicants with sufficient special interest to sue.

The applicants operated a contributory funeral benefit fund for members of the Aboriginal community in New South Wales. It was authorised to do so by a 1994 Ministerial exemption from the prohibition under the Funeral Funds Act 1979 (NSW).

In 1996, a similar exemption was granted to the New South Wales Aboriginal Land Councils Funeral Contribution Fund. This was operated by the Bateman's Bay Local Aboriginal Land Council ('the LALC') and the New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council under arrangements in which the LALC effectively delegated power to the NSWALC, as the latter lacked express power to operate such an enterprise. The Fund was able to offer funeral benefits at rates much lower than the applicants could because of a guarantee and indemnity provided by the NSWALC.

The issue was whether the applicants had sufficient interest to seek injunctions in their own right to restrain the respondents from acting beyond their statutory powers.

McLelland CJ in Eq. held that they lacked standing, but, on appeal, the Court of Appeal disagreed. On further appeal, all members of the High Court bench agreed that the appellants had sufficient interest to bring the proceedings.

[Editorial note: The judgments are particularly important for the review and restatement of Australian law generally on the requirements for standing in such cases.]