Queensland steps back from blanket court fights over native title claims after federal court pressure

The Queensland government has reversed course on a directive that would have seen the state contest every new native title claim in court, after the policy change triggered concern in the Federal Court and caused uncertainty for claim groups and negotiations.

The approach (attributed to a February directive from Natural Resources Minister Dale Last) marked a sharp departure from the more common practice of resolving claims through consent determinations, where the parties negotiate and the Federal Court signs off on an agreed outcome. Consent processes are generally faster and less costly than contested litigation and are frequently used to avoid lengthy hearings and delays.

The state’s shift became public during a long-running matter involving the Cape York United #1 claim group, in which the court sought an explanation for why Queensland had altered its position on areas it had previously been prepared to accept. Chief Justice Debra Mortimer, in an order reported by media, raised concerns about the state’s stance and the prospect of matters being pushed towards trial.

According to reporting, an affidavit from acting director-general Amy Rosanowski described instructions flowing from the ministerial direction. “I instructed NTILS (Native Title and Indigenous Land Services) officers a) to cease reviewing connection materials for the purpose of reaching consent determinations in this proceeding” she said.

Queensland has now “backflipped” on the blanket approach, with legal advice that the state will assess matters on a case-by-case basis rather than automatically contesting all claims. The reversal follows scrutiny from the Federal Court and comes amid wider concerns that inconsistent government positions can stall negotiations, increase legal costs and prolong uncertainty for Traditional Owners.

The dispute has renewed attention on how state governments resource and manage native title work, particularly in complex claim areas like Cape York where multiple groups and overlapping interests can create long timelines. It also highlights the Federal Court’s role in case management when government decisions risk derailing established pathways to resolution.