❓ A parliamentary question seeks transparency regarding the WA government's policy on appealing native title decisions. The government acknowledges a policy exists but declines to table it due to its relation to litigation, legal advice, and cabinet deliberations.
AnsweredQoN 872Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
NATIVE TITLE - GOVERNMENT POLICY
(1) Has the state government prepared, or caused to be prepared, a policy setting out its current approach to appealing, amongst other things, native title decisions? (2) If yes to (1), will the government table a copy of the policy? (3) If yes to (1), but no to (2), why not? (4) Are there any other current policies that guide state government decision making about appealing native title decisions? (5) If yes to (4), will the government table a copy of any policies? (6) If no to (5), why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH
(1) Has the state government prepared, or caused to be prepared, a policy setting out its current approach to appealing, amongst other things, native title decisions? (2) If yes to (1), will the government table a copy of the policy? (3) If yes to (1), but no to (2), why not? (4) Are there any other current policies that guide state government decision making about appealing native title decisions? (5) If yes to (4), will the government table a copy of any policies? (6) If no to (5), why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(6) The state government’s native title policy is to mediate rather than litigate native title matters, where possible. This includes avoiding litigation through involvement in the appeals of Federal Court decisions on native title claims. However, there are times when it may be in the public interest for the state to appeal such Federal Court decisions. The decision to appeal any particular judgment is made on a case-by-case basis, giving consideration to the legal advice on possible appeal points and other relevant considerations. An internal policy has been developed to guide decisions about appealing such matters. However, as it relates to the litigation process, provision of legal advice and cabinet deliberations, it is not appropriate for it to be tabled.
(2) If yes to (1), will the government table a copy of the policy? (3) If yes to (1), but no to (2), why not? (4) Are there any other current policies that guide state government decision making about appealing native title decisions? (5) If yes to (4), will the government table a copy of any policies? (6) If no to (5), why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(6) The state government’s native title policy is to mediate rather than litigate native title matters, where possible. This includes avoiding litigation through involvement in the appeals of Federal Court decisions on native title claims. However, there are times when it may be in the public interest for the state to appeal such Federal Court decisions. The decision to appeal any particular judgment is made on a case-by-case basis, giving consideration to the legal advice on possible appeal points and other relevant considerations. An internal policy has been developed to guide decisions about appealing such matters. However, as it relates to the litigation process, provision of legal advice and cabinet deliberations, it is not appropriate for it to be tabled.
(3) If yes to (1), but no to (2), why not? (4) Are there any other current policies that guide state government decision making about appealing native title decisions? (5) If yes to (4), will the government table a copy of any policies? (6) If no to (5), why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(6) The state government’s native title policy is to mediate rather than litigate native title matters, where possible. This includes avoiding litigation through involvement in the appeals of Federal Court decisions on native title claims. However, there are times when it may be in the public interest for the state to appeal such Federal Court decisions. The decision to appeal any particular judgment is made on a case-by-case basis, giving consideration to the legal advice on possible appeal points and other relevant considerations. An internal policy has been developed to guide decisions about appealing such matters. However, as it relates to the litigation process, provision of legal advice and cabinet deliberations, it is not appropriate for it to be tabled.
(4) Are there any other current policies that guide state government decision making about appealing native title decisions? (5) If yes to (4), will the government table a copy of any policies? (6) If no to (5), why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(6) The state government’s native title policy is to mediate rather than litigate native title matters, where possible. This includes avoiding litigation through involvement in the appeals of Federal Court decisions on native title claims. However, there are times when it may be in the public interest for the state to appeal such Federal Court decisions. The decision to appeal any particular judgment is made on a case-by-case basis, giving consideration to the legal advice on possible appeal points and other relevant considerations. An internal policy has been developed to guide decisions about appealing such matters. However, as it relates to the litigation process, provision of legal advice and cabinet deliberations, it is not appropriate for it to be tabled.
(5) If yes to (4), will the government table a copy of any policies? (6) If no to (5), why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(6) The state government’s native title policy is to mediate rather than litigate native title matters, where possible. This includes avoiding litigation through involvement in the appeals of Federal Court decisions on native title claims. However, there are times when it may be in the public interest for the state to appeal such Federal Court decisions. The decision to appeal any particular judgment is made on a case-by-case basis, giving consideration to the legal advice on possible appeal points and other relevant considerations. An internal policy has been developed to guide decisions about appealing such matters. However, as it relates to the litigation process, provision of legal advice and cabinet deliberations, it is not appropriate for it to be tabled.
(6) If no to (5), why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(6) The state government’s native title policy is to mediate rather than litigate native title matters, where possible. This includes avoiding litigation through involvement in the appeals of Federal Court decisions on native title claims. However, there are times when it may be in the public interest for the state to appeal such Federal Court decisions. The decision to appeal any particular judgment is made on a case-by-case basis, giving consideration to the legal advice on possible appeal points and other relevant considerations. An internal policy has been developed to guide decisions about appealing such matters. However, as it relates to the litigation process, provision of legal advice and cabinet deliberations, it is not appropriate for it to be tabled.
Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(6) The state government’s native title policy is to mediate rather than litigate native title matters, where possible. This includes avoiding litigation through involvement in the appeals of Federal Court decisions on native title claims. However, there are times when it may be in the public interest for the state to appeal such Federal Court decisions. The decision to appeal any particular judgment is made on a case-by-case basis, giving consideration to the legal advice on possible appeal points and other relevant considerations. An internal policy has been developed to guide decisions about appealing such matters. However, as it relates to the litigation process, provision of legal advice and cabinet deliberations, it is not appropriate for it to be tabled.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(6) The state government’s native title policy is to mediate rather than litigate native title matters, where possible. This includes avoiding litigation through involvement in the appeals of Federal Court decisions on native title claims. However, there are times when it may be in the public interest for the state to appeal such Federal Court decisions. The decision to appeal any particular judgment is made on a case-by-case basis, giving consideration to the legal advice on possible appeal points and other relevant considerations. An internal policy has been developed to guide decisions about appealing such matters. However, as it relates to the litigation process, provision of legal advice and cabinet deliberations, it is not appropriate for it to be tabled.
(1)-(6) The state government’s native title policy is to mediate rather than litigate native title matters, where possible. This includes avoiding litigation through involvement in the appeals of Federal Court decisions on native title claims. However, there are times when it may be in the public interest for the state to appeal such Federal Court decisions. The decision to appeal any particular judgment is made on a case-by-case basis, giving consideration to the legal advice on possible appeal points and other relevant considerations. An internal policy has been developed to guide decisions about appealing such matters. However, as it relates to the litigation process, provision of legal advice and cabinet deliberations, it is not appropriate for it to be tabled.
(2) If yes to (1), will the government table a copy of the policy? (3) If yes to (1), but no to (2), why not? (4) Are there any other current policies that guide state government decision making about appealing native title decisions? (5) If yes to (4), will the government table a copy of any policies? (6) If no to (5), why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(6) The state government’s native title policy is to mediate rather than litigate native title matters, where possible. This includes avoiding litigation through involvement in the appeals of Federal Court decisions on native title claims. However, there are times when it may be in the public interest for the state to appeal such Federal Court decisions. The decision to appeal any particular judgment is made on a case-by-case basis, giving consideration to the legal advice on possible appeal points and other relevant considerations. An internal policy has been developed to guide decisions about appealing such matters. However, as it relates to the litigation process, provision of legal advice and cabinet deliberations, it is not appropriate for it to be tabled.
(3) If yes to (1), but no to (2), why not? (4) Are there any other current policies that guide state government decision making about appealing native title decisions? (5) If yes to (4), will the government table a copy of any policies? (6) If no to (5), why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(6) The state government’s native title policy is to mediate rather than litigate native title matters, where possible. This includes avoiding litigation through involvement in the appeals of Federal Court decisions on native title claims. However, there are times when it may be in the public interest for the state to appeal such Federal Court decisions. The decision to appeal any particular judgment is made on a case-by-case basis, giving consideration to the legal advice on possible appeal points and other relevant considerations. An internal policy has been developed to guide decisions about appealing such matters. However, as it relates to the litigation process, provision of legal advice and cabinet deliberations, it is not appropriate for it to be tabled.
(4) Are there any other current policies that guide state government decision making about appealing native title decisions? (5) If yes to (4), will the government table a copy of any policies? (6) If no to (5), why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(6) The state government’s native title policy is to mediate rather than litigate native title matters, where possible. This includes avoiding litigation through involvement in the appeals of Federal Court decisions on native title claims. However, there are times when it may be in the public interest for the state to appeal such Federal Court decisions. The decision to appeal any particular judgment is made on a case-by-case basis, giving consideration to the legal advice on possible appeal points and other relevant considerations. An internal policy has been developed to guide decisions about appealing such matters. However, as it relates to the litigation process, provision of legal advice and cabinet deliberations, it is not appropriate for it to be tabled.
(5) If yes to (4), will the government table a copy of any policies? (6) If no to (5), why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(6) The state government’s native title policy is to mediate rather than litigate native title matters, where possible. This includes avoiding litigation through involvement in the appeals of Federal Court decisions on native title claims. However, there are times when it may be in the public interest for the state to appeal such Federal Court decisions. The decision to appeal any particular judgment is made on a case-by-case basis, giving consideration to the legal advice on possible appeal points and other relevant considerations. An internal policy has been developed to guide decisions about appealing such matters. However, as it relates to the litigation process, provision of legal advice and cabinet deliberations, it is not appropriate for it to be tabled.
(6) If no to (5), why not? Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(6) The state government’s native title policy is to mediate rather than litigate native title matters, where possible. This includes avoiding litigation through involvement in the appeals of Federal Court decisions on native title claims. However, there are times when it may be in the public interest for the state to appeal such Federal Court decisions. The decision to appeal any particular judgment is made on a case-by-case basis, giving consideration to the legal advice on possible appeal points and other relevant considerations. An internal policy has been developed to guide decisions about appealing such matters. However, as it relates to the litigation process, provision of legal advice and cabinet deliberations, it is not appropriate for it to be tabled.
Hon LJILJANNA RAVLICH replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(6) The state government’s native title policy is to mediate rather than litigate native title matters, where possible. This includes avoiding litigation through involvement in the appeals of Federal Court decisions on native title claims. However, there are times when it may be in the public interest for the state to appeal such Federal Court decisions. The decision to appeal any particular judgment is made on a case-by-case basis, giving consideration to the legal advice on possible appeal points and other relevant considerations. An internal policy has been developed to guide decisions about appealing such matters. However, as it relates to the litigation process, provision of legal advice and cabinet deliberations, it is not appropriate for it to be tabled.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1)-(6) The state government’s native title policy is to mediate rather than litigate native title matters, where possible. This includes avoiding litigation through involvement in the appeals of Federal Court decisions on native title claims. However, there are times when it may be in the public interest for the state to appeal such Federal Court decisions. The decision to appeal any particular judgment is made on a case-by-case basis, giving consideration to the legal advice on possible appeal points and other relevant considerations. An internal policy has been developed to guide decisions about appealing such matters. However, as it relates to the litigation process, provision of legal advice and cabinet deliberations, it is not appropriate for it to be tabled.
(1)-(6) The state government’s native title policy is to mediate rather than litigate native title matters, where possible. This includes avoiding litigation through involvement in the appeals of Federal Court decisions on native title claims. However, there are times when it may be in the public interest for the state to appeal such Federal Court decisions. The decision to appeal any particular judgment is made on a case-by-case basis, giving consideration to the legal advice on possible appeal points and other relevant considerations. An internal policy has been developed to guide decisions about appealing such matters. However, as it relates to the litigation process, provision of legal advice and cabinet deliberations, it is not appropriate for it to be tabled.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.