Wik Peoples v Queensland
Wik Peoples v The State of Queensland (commonly known as the Wik decision) is a decision of the High Court of Australia delivered on 23 December 1996, on whether statutory leases extinguish native title rights. The court found that the statutory pastoral leases under consideration by the court did not bestow rights of exclusive possession on the leaseholder. As a result, native title rights could coexist depending on the terms and nature of the particular pastoral lease. Where there was a conflict of rights, the rights under the pastoral lease would extinguish the remaining native title rights.
| Wik Peoples v Queensland | |
|---|---|
| Court | High Court of Australia |
| Full case name | The Wik Peoples v State of Queensland & Ors; The Thayorre People v State of Queensland & Ors |
| Decided | 23 December 1996 |
| Citation(s) | [1996] HCA 40, (1996) 187 CLR 1 |
| Case history | |
| Prior action(s) | Wik Peoples v Queensland (1996) 63 FCR 450; 134 ALR 637 |
| Appealed from | Federal Court |
| Case opinions | |
| (4:3) the pastoral leases in question did not extinguish native title (4:3) native title rights and pastoral lease rights can coexist, but where they are inconsistent, the pastoral rights prevail | |
| Majority | Toohey, Gaudron, Gummow & Kirby JJ |
| Dissent | Brennan CJ, Dawson & McHugh JJ decision |
The decision provoked a significant debate in Australian politics. It led to intense discussions on the validity of land holdings in Australia. Some political leaders criticised the court for being out of touch and for introducing uncertainty into Australian life. The Howard government formulated a "10-point plan" to bring certainty to land ownership in Australia. This plan led to the longest debate in the Australian Senate’s history.