Woods v Gandangara Local Aboriginal Land Council; Thatcher v Gandangara Local Aboriginal Land Council. País/Territorio Australia Tipo de la corte Otros Fecha Mar 23, 2011 Fuente UNEP, InforMEA Nombre del tribunal Land and Environment Court of New South Wales Juez Pepper. Número de referencia 2011] NSWLEC 42 Idioma Inglés Materia Medio ambiente gen., Tierra y suelos Palabra clave Derechos tradicionales/derechos consuetudinarios Tenencia de tierras Propiedad de extranjeros Pueblos indígenas Resumen Ms Ann Thatcher and Mr Jeffery Woods, the applicants, sought declaratory and injunctive relief in order to prevent the respondent, the Gandangara Local Aboriginal Land Council, from pursuing possession proceedings in the Consumer, Trade and Tenancy Tribunal (“the CTTT”), against them as tenants pursuant to residential tenancy agreements. Ms Thatcher received a notice of termination on 31 August 2009 from the respondent requiring her to give vacant possession by 3 November 2009. Mr Woods received a similar notice of termination on 2 October 2009 from the respondent that required vacant possession by 1 December 2009. Both of the applicants did not comply with the notices, which were issued pursuant to s 58 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1987 (“the RTA”), resulting in the respondent commencing proceedings in the CTTT. The decisions to issue the notices of termination were made by the Chief Executive Officer of the respondent to whom the power had been purportedly delegated by a resolution of the voting members of the respondent on 21 March 2007. In accordance with s 52E(1)(a) of the Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983 (“the ALRA”), certain functions of the respondent are unable to be delegated, including those concerning the “ use, management, control, holding or disposal of, or otherwise dealing with, land”. As a consequence, a resolution of the voting members of the respondent is required pursuant to s 52G(e) of the ALRA for “approval of dealings with land”. The Court was required to decide a number of questions in this judgment. Of most relevance to LALCs was whether the notices of termination were a land dealing and if so, whether a members' resolution was required to give the notices, or whether this function could be delegated. The Court held that residential tenancy agreements were dealings with land for the purposes of sections 52E and 52G. This was because the scope and purpose of the ALRA required, "land dealings" as used in those sections to be interpreted broadly.Further, the Court said that a termination of residential tenancy agreements is also a land dealing and it is separate to the land dealing that commenced the tenancy. The effect of the judgment is that entering into and deciding to terminate residential tenancy agreements cannot be delegated by members. Resolutions of the voting members of the Council are required for entry into a residential tenancy agreement and the termination of one. The Court granted an injunction against GLALC from pursuing actions to evict in the CTTT in reliance upon the notices of termination issued pursuant to March 2007 resolution. It also found that the notices of termination fell within s52E(1), and that in this instance this function was not properly exercised, due to the lack of a member's resolution to terminate the agreements and evict.