Legal development

Inching forward: native title compensation in 2025-2026

Red sandy outback soil dotted with silvery saltbush and native trees under a blue sky with streaks of cloud.

    Native title year in review 2025-2026

    What you need to know

    What you need to do

    • Review the Yindjibarndi and McArthur River decisions carefully. They will have wide-ranging implications for the assessment of compensation for mining and resource extraction projects, and more generally for the negotiation of future native title agreements.
    • Monitor the Gumatj and related proceedings over the Gove Peninsula. If the matter proceeds to hearing in 2027, it will be the next major contested compensation claim to be determined.

    Summary of developments in the last 12 months 

    We have reported on developments in the native title compensation space annually since our inaugural Native Title Year in Review in 2015.

    The last 12 months have been headlined by the handing down of two significant compensation decisions: the Federal Court's determination of the Yindjibarndi compensation claim over Fortescue's Solomon Hub mine in Western Australia, and the McArthur River decision (see our Native Title Year in Review 2025-2026 articles, "Federal Court creates more precedent for native title compensation" and "$54M for cultural loss in McArthur River Mine native title compensation claim").

    Together, these are the most substantial judicial developments in native title compensation since the High Court's 2019 decision in Timber Creek, and will shape how future claims are run and assessed.

    Beyond these decisions, the compensation claims we have been following continue to inch forward through mediation and case management. We summarise their current status below.

    The Australian Law Reform Commission's March 2026 report (Fulfilling the Promise of Mabo: Reforming the Future Acts Regime in the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) (ALRC Report 144)) contains significant recommendations relating to "redress" and the payment of up-front compensation in relation to future acts. It does not address how such compensation should be calculated (or by whom) and clarifies that Part 2 Division 5 compensation applications would remain available to adjust the extent of upfront payments. It is not likely that these recommendations will have any impact on current compensation claims. See our Native Title Year in Review 2025-2026 article, "ALRC recommends sweeping Native Title Act changes" for more information about the Report.

    In January 2026, the NSW Government published a draft consultation paper about a proposed state-based policy approach to proactively settling all aspects of NSW native title claims under the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth). The draft policy includes a compensation component, in conjunction with a consent determination and ILUA. The proposal wraps up corporate and benefits management structuring and is directed towards ensuring sustainable PBC arrangements. Consultation with native title groups occurred between February and May 2026. The NSW Government has not yet announced the next steps.

    We report on developments in native title compensation claims over the last 12 months below.

    Active compensation claims

    Pitta Pitta Compensation Claims – Queensland (QUD327/2020 and QUD60/2024)

    Recap: The Pitta Pitta compensation claim relates to hundreds of compensable acts spread across three million hectares of land and waters in western Queensland. 

    The original compensation application was filed in 2020 by five individual Pitta Pitta native title holders. In early 2024, the Pitta Pitta Aboriginal Corporation RNTBC filed a fresh compensation claim over the same area covered by the original claim. The compensable acts claimed in each proceeding were also the same. Given the overlap, the Federal Court ordered that the claims be consolidated into a single proceeding. 

    Following Court supervised mediation, the State, applicant and RNTBC reached an "in principle agreement" for the settlement of the consolidated proceeding by way of lump sum payment for all compensable acts.

    What's new: In our Native Title Year in Review 2024-2025 article, "Glacial progress of developments in native title compensation", we reported a number of unresolved issues between the applicant and the RNTBC, including how the applicant's former and current legal advisers would be paid out of the compensation sum. Those issues appear to remain unresolved, with the Court granting third party claimants leave to intervene in the proceeding to establish the existence, scope and quantum of their asserted claims for costs.

    On 25 June 2026, the Court directed the Pitta Pitta People and the State of Queensland to attend a mediation. The aim of this mediation was to organise a public meeting where the Pitta Pitta People can receive legal advice about the third party claims, and to arrange an authorisation meeting. To help move matters forward, the State agreed to pay for an independent facilitator to run an advice meeting for the Pitta Pitta People.

    This claim is slowly progressing, although the parties remain in case management, with no substantive hearing dates listed.

    Gumatj and related Compensation Claim – Northern Territory (NTD42/2019, NTD43/2019, NTD15/2025, NTD16/2025, NTD17/2025, NTD23/2025 and NTD24/2025)

    Recap: In early 2025, the High Court of Australia handed down its landmark decision of Commonwealth of Australia v Yunupingu on behalf of the Gumatj Clan or Estate Group [2025] HCA 6.

    The High Court upheld the Full Federal Court's finding that Commonwealth actions undertaken prior to 1975 were capable of giving rise to compensation under the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) on the basis that such actions constituted invalid acquisitions of property in breach of the just terms guarantee imposed by section 51(xxxi) of the Australian Constitution. 

    This decision marked a significant step for the Gumatj Clan, who are seeking compensation under the Native Title Act for the 1939 vesting of minerals in the Crown and the grant of certain leases between the 1930s and 1960s. 

    For the Gumatj Clan's compensation claim to succeed, they must first prove that they hold native title in the Gove Peninsula area. The Federal Court is currently assessing that claim, though a final determination remains some years away with the question of who holds native title over the Gove Peninsula being contested by a number of other clans. 

    What's new: In our Native Title Year in Review 2024-2025 article, "Glacial progress of developments in native title compensation", we reported that four overlapping native title claims and one overlapping compensation claim had been filed over the Gove Peninsula. The Federal Court directed that these claims be case managed alongside the Gumatj claims and referred the combined proceedings to mediation to encourage the Indigenous parties to agree on who holds native title in the area. 

    The first stage of mediation concluded earlier this year, and a mediation report has been provided to the parties. It appears that the parties were unable to agree on who holds native title, with the Court directing the parties to attend a further mediation before a retired Judge with a background in native title and a Registrar. This second mediation was to be completed by 30 September 2026.

    The combined proceedings have been provisionally listed for hearing in 2027, with dates set down from 21 June to 9 July and 30 August to 17 September. Ahead of the trial, the Court had been expected to conduct a preservation of evidence hearing in the Gumatj claims. That hearing was vacated but affidavit evidence has been received by the Court. 

    With no agreement between the Indigenous parties about who holds native title in the Gove Peninsula, resolution of the Gumatj compensation claim remains some years away.

    Antakirinja Matu-Yankunytjatjara Compensation Claim – South Australia (SAD61/2022)

    Recap: The Antakirinja Matu-Yankunytjatjara Aboriginal Corporation RNTBC (AMYAC) is seeking compensation for over 1,000 compensable acts across more than 60,000 km² of land in central South Australia. These acts include freehold grants, pastoral leases, Crown leases, mining tenements and the construction of public works and roads. The claim was filed in April 2022 and immediately referred to mediation between AMYAC and the State of South Australia. A hearing to preserve evidence was scheduled for June 2023 but was called off due to the declining health of a key witness. The parties have been in regular mediation since 2023.

    What's new: This matter remains in mediation, with no significant developments to report over the past 12 months.

    Want to know more? 

    Authors: Tony Denholder, Partner; Leonie Flynn, Expertise Counsel and Ella Moore, Graduate.

    The information provided is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all developments in the law and practice, or to cover all aspects of those referred to.
    Readers should take legal advice before applying it to specific issues or transactions.