Mabo v State of Queensland (No2)
| Jurisdiction | Queensland |
| Judgment Date | 03 June 1992 |
| Neutral Citation | 1992-0603 HCA F,[1992] HCA 23 |
| Court | High Court |
| Date | 03 June 1992 |
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Start Your 7-day Trial
331 cases
-
John Hanita Paki and Others v Attorney-General of New Zealand for and on Behalf of The Crown
...v Baker [1901] AC 561 (PC) at 577. 309 Native Land Act 1909, ss 84-87. 310 Section 88. 311 Section 88(2). 312 Mabo v Queensland (No 2) (1992) 175 CLR 1 at 313 Hospital Products Ltd v United States Surgical Corp (1984) 156 CLR 41 at 96-97. 314 Paragon Finance Plc v DB Thakerar & Co [1999]......
-
Takamore v Clarke COA CA
...of customary law is inherent in the recognition of aboriginal property in cases such as Attorney-General v Ngati Apa 62 and Mabo v Queensland. 63 This is because customary law defines the content of aboriginal proprietary rights. 64 In Ngati Apa, Keith J quoted with approval Professor D P O......
- Merang Jok and Others v Government of Malaysia and Others
- Director of Forest, Sarawak v Tr Sandah ak Tabau (suing on behalf of themselves and 22 other proprietors, the occupiers, holders and the claimants of native customary rights (NCR) lands situated at Rumah Sandah and Rumah Lajang, Ulu Machan, 96700 Kanowit
Get Started for Free
5 firm's commentaries
-
Federal Court judgment commentary: Native title
...(2004) 28(1) Melbourne University Law Review 28 Peter Butt, Land Law (Thomson Reuters, 6th ed, 2010) B Cases Mabo v Queensland (No 2) (1992) 175 CLR 1 Yunupingu on behalf of the Gumatj Clan or Estate Group v Commonwealth of Australia [2023] FCAFC 75 C Legislation Aboriginal Land Rights Act ......
-
Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Barker: High Court closes the door on the invisible trust and confidence term, but will another door then open to something more effective and visible?
...exactly a classic example of incremental development in the common law either. The decision of the High Court in Mabo v The Queen (No 2) (1992) 175 CLR 1 in fact totally rejected a long line of common law authority that Australia was "terra nullius" when the British arrived. We all coped wi......
-
Love v Commonwealth; Thoms v Commonwealth [2020] HCA 3
...question of his status to the Federal Court.16 Footnotes 1 Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (Cth) (the Constitution). 2 (1992) 175 CLR 1 ('Mabo [No 2]'); Love v Commonwealth; Thoms v Commonwealth [2020] HCA 3 at [71], [268], [289], [298], [350], [373], [451] ('Love v 3 Love v......
-
Migration Matters | Immigration Update May 2023
...who are not Australian citizens or permanent residents, and who satisfy the tripartite test as set out in Mabo v Queensland [No. 2] (1992) 175 CLR 1, as a result of the High Court's decision in Love v Commonwealth; Thoms v Commonwealth (2020) 270 CLR Eligible individuals will be invited to ......
Get Started for Free
110 books & journal articles
-
Native title and the 'acquisition of property' under the Australian constitution.
...people were compounded by the present-day denial of an otherwise broadly available constitutional right. (1) Mabo v Queensland [No 2] (1992) 175 CLR 1 ('Mabo [No (2) Section 51(xxxi) of the Constitution provides: The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws fo......
-
National litigation and international law: repercussions for Australia's protection of marine resources.
...of the common law. (96) Dietrich v The Queen (1992) 177 CLR 292, 321 (Brennan J); see also at 360 (Toohey J); Mabo v Queensland [No 2] (1992) 175 CLR 1, 42 (Brennan J). See also Cachia v Hanes (1991) 23 NSWLR 304, 313 (Kirby P); Young v Registrar, Court of Appeal [No 3] (1993) 32 NSWLR 262,......
-
The legal and commercial frameworks
...in australia is limited, and generally arises for consideration in disputes over property rights: see, eg, Mabo v Queensland (No 2) (1992) 175 CLr 1. aboriginal 6 ThE LEGaL aND COMMErCIaL FraMEWOrKS to ind out what are the laws of England, Australia, Hong Kong and Singapore is that they are......
-
Territory Courts and Federal Jurisdiction
...668, 671 (Gibbs CJ, Aickin, Wilson and Brennan JJ); Breavington v Godleman (1988) 169 CLR 41, 123 (Deane J); Mabo v Queensland (No 2) (1992) 175 CLR 1, 15 (Mason CJ and McHugh J), 57–8, 69 (Brennan J); Dietrich v The Queen (1992) 177 CLR 292, 297–8, 306–7, 311 (Mason CJ and McHugh J), 316 (......
Get Started for Free