Despite the repeal of the Indigenous Land Use Regulations 1998, these Regulations continue to apply with respect to applications for registration of an Indigenous Land Use Agreement submitted prior to the commencement of these Regulations. The Native Title Act 1993 allows applicants for mining or exploration authorities and parties to the title, registered and specific, to enter into indigenous land use agreements on how the lands and waters of the contract area will be used and managed in the future. This manual discusses the different types of agreements that might be relevant to your application. An Indigenous Land Use Agreement is a voluntary agreement between a national title group and other parties on the use and management of land and water. All native title claims have “registered native title holders”. These are in fact several persons appointed and authorized by the largest group of national titles as representatives of the claims group, and their names are entered in the register maintained by the National Native Title Tribunal (NNTT). It is possible to change the rights holders for a right, but such a process is not easy. The larger group must approve the amendment and a request for justice must be filed. As a result, the modification of applicants often takes some time and is often a contentious issue (i.e.
there may be disagreements within the group of claims on the identity of the applicants). Since many claims often take many years to be decided, one of the plaintiffs can sometimes die. However, in this case, the person always remains one of the plaintiffs, unless he is removed by the legal proceedings – the NTA does not provide that a deceased person automatically ceases to be a plaintiff. Native Title is the recognition in Australian law that certain indigenous peoples retain local, collective or individual rights and interests in their lands and waters. These collective rights and interests derive from traditional laws and customs. Alternatively, the Native Title Act allows national title groups and other interested parties to voluntarily enter into agreements known as Indigenous Land Use Agreements (ILAAs). ILUAs can cover both future actions (e.g. B exploration or mining activities) and future activities (e.g. B user and access agreements governing coexent rights).
Upon registration, ILUA shall bind all parties and holders of national securities to the terms of the agreement. On February 2, in the McGlade decision, the Full Federal Court stated that each of the four agreements was not an ILUA within the meaning of the NTA and that the registrar of the native title was not responsible for registering the agreements.2 (i) a registered entity is a party to the agreement; and the Centre for Social Responsibility of the Mining Industry has developed a guide on entering into agreements with indigenous groups, which contains useful case studies on successful mining and resource development projects on the national territory. . . .