Exercise 019 | Law

Exercise 019

Native Title: Robert Charles Bropho v F.A. Ball & Anor [1997] 30 FCA (1 February 1997)

click here to download this document
click here (AustLII link) to view the case

Easy questions

  1. What is the citation of the case?
  2. In what court did the case take place? Where does this court sit in the court hierarchy?
  3. Who were the applicant/s and who appeared for them?
  4. Who were the respondent/s and who appeared for them?
  5. What type of case is this - civil, criminal, appellate, first instance?
  6. Is this an authorised report?
  7. Explain the following terms (using your legal dictionary):
    1. interlocutory injunction
    2. affidavits
    3. prima facie
    4. native title
    5. balance of convenience
  8. What facts gave rise to the dispute?
  9. Who was the judge?
  10. Could there be an appeal from this case? If so, to what court?
  11. What was the outcome?

More difficult questions

  1. What was the purpose of the last paragraph of the introduction?
  2. What is the first stage in the assessment of a grant of interlocutory injunction?
  3. What were the major legal questions with which the case dealt?
  4. What reasons did counsel for the applicant give for the building of the jetty being inconsistent with Native Title?
  5. What evidence did counsel for the applicant give of a serious question to be tried?
  6. What arguments did counsel for the respondents give for the validity of the jetty licence?
  7. What did the judge decide regarding the question of a serious question to be tried?
    1. Did the judge consider that this was sufficient for his decision?
    2. Why or why not?
  8. What was the relevance of the historical background to Mr Bropho's claim?
  9. What discretionary factors were brought into play by the judge regarding his decision?
  10. Why was the judge able to bring such discretionary factors into play?

Complex questions

  1. What use does the applicant make of the Wik case?
  2. What was the judge's position on the applicant's claim of native title?
    1. What legislation did the judge make use of to this end?
    2. How did he make use of this legislation?
  3. Do you think the judge applied precedent exactly, or did he change the law in some way?
  4. What do you think of the judge's reasoning and decision?