top of page

Yanner v Eaton (1999) 201 CLR 351

  • Writer: Head Editor
    Head Editor
  • Jul 9, 2023
  • 2 min read

Gleeson CJ, Gaudron J, McHugh J, Gummow J, Kirby J, Hayne J, Callinan J


Native title - Constitutional Law - Inconsistency between State and Federal Law

Facts; The case involved Mr Yanner, an Aboriginal man from Queensland, who was charged with hunting and possessing a protected animal (a crocodile) in contravention of the Queensland Fauna Conservation Act 1974. Mr Yanner argued that as an Aboriginal person, he had a native title right to hunt for personal, non-commercial purposes, and therefore, the State legislation should not apply to him.

Law; The central question before the court was whether the Queensland legislation was inconsistent with the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth), a federal law that recognizes and protects the native title rights of Indigenous Australians. The Native Title Act was enacted to ensure that native title rights are not extinguished by subsequent laws unless they are expressly inconsistent.

The court emphasized that native title rights are protected by the Constitution and that any legislation that substantially impairs those rights is invalid. The decision affirmed the importance of recognizing and protecting Indigenous rights, including the right to hunt for personal, non-commercial purposes as part of their native title rights.


Holding; In a unanimous decision, the High Court held that the Queensland legislation was inconsistent with the Native Title Act. The court reasoned that the relevant provisions of the Queensland law, which prohibited hunting and possessing protected animals, affected the exercise of native title rights. As a result, the state legislation was invalid to the extent of the inconsistency.

Yanner v Eaton clarified the relationship between federal and state legislation regarding native title rights. It established that state laws that significantly interfere with the exercise of native title rights may be invalid to the extent of the inconsistency with federal law. The case also highlighted the constitutional protection of native title rights and reinforced the principle of reconciliation between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians.

Overall, Yanner v Eaton played a crucial role in shaping the legal framework for the recognition and protection of native title rights in Australia, affirming the significance of Indigenous rights and promoting the reconciliation process.

46 commenti


lili xie
lili xie
7 days ago

A case about hunting a crocodile led to such an important legal ruling; the details are thought-provoking. By the way, try drive mad for wild stunt-driving fun with wacky physics!

Mi piace

sharly yang
sharly yang
7 days ago

Seeing the High Court uphold Indigenous traditional hunting rights feels like a great act of respect for culture and history! Speaking of fun games, Ragdoll Archers offers unique arrows and exciting battles—give it a shot!

Mi piace

top game
top game
7 days ago

This article helped me understand the significance of the Yanner v Eaton case in protecting Indigenous rights in Australia; it's truly a pivotal legal decision. By the way, try Doodle Baseball for quirky baseball fun with doodle-style graphics!

Mi piace

Watch4 beauty
Watch4 beauty
01 lug

Consistently meets expectations and contributes positively. Erothotsy

Mi piace

vandanaswarajmanturgekar
01 lug

Intent-Based Networking (IBN) is a modern approach to network management that uses artificial intelligence, machine learning, and automation to translate high-level business intent into network policies and configurations. Unlike traditional networking, where administrators manually configure network devices, IBN allows network operators to define what they want the network to achieve—such as ensuring security compliance or optimizing application performance—and the system automatically implements, monitors, and adjusts the network accordingly. This reduces human error, increases agility, and ensures that network behavior aligns with organizational goals.

IBN architectures typically include four key components: intent translation, automated implementation, assurance and verification, and continuous adaptation. These systems continuously monitor network conditions and use analytics to verify that the intent is being fulfilled, correcting deviations proactively. IBN…

Mi piace

In the spirit of reconciliation, Survive Law acknowledges the Traditional Custodians of Country throughout Australia and their connections to land, sea and community. We pay our respect to their Elders past and present and extend that respect to all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples today.

© Survive Law 2023

bottom of page