Ask a question from expert

Ask now

Study of MABO Case Judgement

9 Pages2637 Words434 Views
   

Added on  2019-11-26

Study of MABO Case Judgement

   Added on 2019-11-26

BookmarkShareRelated Documents
Running head: MABO CASE 0Business LawAssignment
Study of MABO Case Judgement_1
MABO CASE1Introduction Mabo and others v Queensland (No 2) (1992) or Mabo case has been a significant case in Australian legislative. For this case, the high court made their historical decision on 3rd June 1992. This case was based on recognising the rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples since they were living in Australia for 40 to 60 thousand years before the British arrive. The case was led by Eddie Mabo which eventually changed the doctrine of ‘terra nullius’. The high court of Australia recognised the rights of Aboriginal peoples because it shows their unique relationship with the land. The decision provided by the the high court does not improved the situation of aboriginal peoples. The high court also introduced a guideline to prove the legitimacy of an indigenous community. Most of the aboriginal people did not get satisfied with the judgement of the highcourt. This essay will discuss the various important elements of the case and analyse its result. Further, the essay will evaluate the legal impact of Mabo case and its effect on the lives of Aboriginal peoples.
Study of MABO Case Judgement_2
MABO CASE2Mabo CaseThe Mabo case is one of the most popular and important cases in Australia. The judgement ofthis case was given by the high court on 3rd June, after a decade long litigation. The judgement was based on reversing the doctrine of terra nullius, which did not recognise the land rights of Aboriginal peoples. The doctrine of terra nullius was based on British law, which provided that all the regulation of England will apply to a new land. According to Short (2012), the court provided that this doctrine does not apply in case of Australia since aboriginal peoples are living for more than 40 to 60 thousand years before the British reaches.The court provided that in order to apply terra nullius the lands should not be barren or inhabited, instead the land should be civilised. The existing customary law of peoples must beacceptable of England law to the extent that their own customary laws are not being modifiedor excluded due to inconsistency with England law. The action against the doctrine was led by Eddie Mabo, who was a Torres Strait Islander. According to the book of Loos and Mabo (2013), Mabo believes that the Australian law does not recognise the land ownership of Aboriginal people. In his childhood, the Torres Strait Islands were rigorously regulated by Queensland administration. He made a speed explainingthe situation of aboriginal peoples and their ownership over the land of Torres Strait Islands. A lawyer heard the speech and ask Mabo to challenge the Australian government to properly establish their land ownership right. This case was important since it identifies the ownership right of Aboriginal peoples over their land which was taken by British without any payment or contract. As per Kennedy (2012), the Mer Islanders decided that Eddie Mabo will lead their suit to challenge the principles of terra nullius. The case ran for 10 years and on 3rd June 1992, the high court provided their decision that principle of terra nullius should not apply over Australia. As per Hayward (2012), the decision recognised the land ownership rights of Aboriginal peoples in the Torres Strait Islands, the same right which was established before British arrival will still be applicable. The high court introduced the conception of native title and recognised that some indigenous peoples have right and interest over certain lands due to their traditional regulations and customs (Council et al. 2015). The Australian parliament in order to establish the interest of aboriginal peoples in their lands passed Native Title Act in 1993. The judgement of Mabo case was known as ‘Mabo decision’.
Study of MABO Case Judgement_3

End of preview

Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.

Related Documents
The Mabo v Queensland (No 2) Case
|10
|2044
|246

Mabo v Queensland: A Landmark Case in Constitutional Law
|16
|4780
|7

The Mabo Decision and the Native Title Act: Benefits and Shortcomings
|7
|2142
|269

HLSZ120 Indigenous Health and Culture Assignment 2022
|4
|743
|22

The Native Title Act Research Paper 2022
|10
|2102
|32

Business Law- Mabo Case (Doc)
|8
|2139
|250