Native title decisions, compensation applications and disputes

Changes to how RNTBCs carry out their work

Making native title decisions

All 'native title decisions' must be made according to the wishes and directions of the common law holders, but for certain types of native title decisions there are options for RNTBCs to work with common law holders to make the process less of a burden—through standing instructions and alternative consultation processes. For example, common law holders can give their RNTBC standing instructions about decisions to enter into:

• an Indigenous Land Use Agreement (ILUA) or
• section 31 agreement under the Native Title Act when the RNTBC itself is the beneficiary or only grantee party (i.e. the body who has applied to the government for the grant of a mining tenement such as exploration licences and mining leases). 

To help figure out which consultation and consent process to use the PBC Regulations categorise native title decisions as high level or low level.

It's optional for the RNTBC to consult with and consider the views of, the relevant native title representative body or service provider before making a native title decision.

RNTBCs must prepare a certificate for every native title decision as evidence that the decision was made following the right process and by the right people.

Making applications for compensation

After an RNTBC has consulted and got consent from the relevant common law holders whose native title has been partially or fully extinguished, it can make a claim for compensation on behalf of relevant native title holders.

Help available to resolve disputes about native title

RNTBCs and common law holders can ask the National Native Title Tribunal to provide assistance to resolve disputes about native title matters such as whether or not a person is a common law holder, or the corporation’s performance of its functions under the native title legislation (section 60AAA of the Native Title Act).