High Court to hear Traditional Owners’ challenge to major NT groundwater licence

The High Court is set to hear a challenge by Central Australian native title holders over one of the Northern Territory’s biggest groundwater licences, in a case that places the cultural meaning of water and the limits of existing water laws under national scrutiny.

The dispute centres on Singleton Station, south of Tennant Creek, where a large-scale irrigated horticulture proposal has been stalled by years of legal and administrative action. A 30-year licence approved by the Northern Territory government would allow up to 40,000 megalitres of groundwater to be taken each year from an underground aquifer to support the project.

Traditional Owners, represented through an Aboriginal corporation connected to multiple native title and traditional owner groups in the area, argue that the scale of extraction risks damaging sacred water sites and undermining native title rights and interests that they say continue to exist alongside pastoral and commercial entitlements.

“If they take too much water it’s going to damage our country, it’s going to damage all our plants and animals and it’s going to damage our culture as well and dreaming and story line,” – Traditional owner Valerie Ngapangardi Curtis

Supporters of the development have pointed to potential economic activity and regional investment, with plans described as an intensive farming operation for fruit and vegetables in an arid environment where surface water is limited. But Traditional Owners say the aquifer and associated sites have deep cultural and spiritual significance, and that water in desert Country cannot be treated as a simple commodity.

The case has been years in the making. Traditional Owners have pursued objections through government processes and the courts since the licence was allocated in 2021. The hearing is expected to focus on how native title rights interact with statutory water allocations, and whether cultural rights and responsibilities over water are properly recognised within the current legal framework.

“We’re not going to stop fighting, because it’s not going to affect us it’s going to affect the next generation in 20 year’s time” – Traditional owner Valerie Ngapangardi Curtis

More broadly, the case comes as communities across Australia continue to press for stronger recognition of Indigenous knowledge systems and cultural authority in environmental decision-making. For many First Nations groups, water governance is not only about ecosystems and economics, but also about law, identity, and obligations to protect places of significance for future generations.

Whatever the outcome, the decision is likely to be closely watched by governments, industry and First Nations organisations, particularly in regions where major irrigation, mining and energy proposals depend on groundwater licences and where Traditional Owners are seeking stronger safeguards.