Abstract

This article considers the origin and development of native title law in Australia since the Mabo decision. It examines native title litigation in the decisions of the Federal and High Court in an attempt to determine whether such litigation has delivered on the principal objectives defined by Mabo, or has moved forward. The aim of the article is to establish whether Mabo is simply a correction of history intended to bring Australia into line with the developments adopted by other jurisdictions, or whether it is a true ‘judicial revolution’. Finally, the article makes a critical and comparative examination of native title in the United States, Canada and New Zealand, which reveals that the Australian approach to native title is far removed from the flexible approaches of those other jurisdictions.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call