Radical title

Radical title is a concept in Australian law that refers to The Crown's underlying title to all land within Australia. It grants The Crown the power to alienate others from land and to transfer beneficial ownership of the land to itself or others, but by itself does not grant beneficial ownership.[1]

History

While not the first time radical title was mentioned, the concept came to prominence after being key in the case of Mabo v Queensland (No 2), which recognised the existence of native title under Australian law. The term was developed to explain how native title rights could co-exist with the doctrine of tenure, under which all rights to land ultimately derive from grants from the Crown and are not absolute. The court declared that on acquisition of sovereignty by the British in 1788, the Crown did not acquire beneficial ownership over all the land the country but a mere radical title to it.[2] This radical title did not extinguish native title, allowing the court to recognise it at the time of the judgment while also recognising the doctrine of tenure. All land grants subsequently made by the Crown were subject to tenure, but native title rights, having existed before acquisition of sovereignty, were not.

References
  1. Bartlett, Richard (2020). Native Title in Australia (4 ed.). LexisNexis Butterworths. pp. 274–276. ISBN 978-0409350920.
  2. Mabo v Queensland (No 2) [1992] HCA 23 at para 50-1, (1992) 175 CLR 1 (3 June 1992), High Court.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.