Federal Court rules Lorella Springs Wilderness Park tourism permit invalid

Following a long-running legal battle, the Federal Court has ruled Lorella Springs' tourism permit invalid.

Native title holders are claiming a "hard fought win", despite the court rejecting a number of their key arguments.

The permit has been set aside, with the Pastoral Land Board ordered to reassess the application "according to law".

Northern Territory native title holders are claiming a "hard fought win" after a Federal Court judge ruled a tourism permit for Lorella Springs Wilderness Park is invalid, and ordered the Pastoral Land Board to reassess the application.

For about two decades, the owners of Lorella Springs, a 400,000-hectare outback cattle station located about 1,000 kilometres from Darwin, ran a significant tourism business with accommodation, a bar, fishing, swimming and helicopter tours.

The station, about 2.5 times the size of London, is also home to protected sacred, burial and ceremony sites.

But the station has been closed to most tourists since January 2023. Only a select number of guided tours have been allowed to visit, with the owners citing "bureaucracy" becoming "too much" to sustain operations.

In 2022, owners Marie and Rhett Walker lodged an application for a "farm tourism operations" permit. Their application said Aboriginal sites would "be avoided from all tourism activity".

The owners also applied to extract water from Rosie Creek.

The Pastoral Land Board granted the permit and the water licence — but in 2025, the Northern Land Council (NLC), on behalf of Burdal Riley, Murrungun Wunubari and Mambali Walangara native title holders, challenged the NT government's decision to grant those.

Concerned that sacred sites in the area had been interfered with in the past, the native title holders argued the tourism activities involved the "observation of Aboriginal cultural works and activities".

They also argued the government had been "unreasonable and irrational" in its decision-making process and failed to consider the presence of threatened species and other environmental issues.

In handing down her lengthy judgement on Friday, Justice Natalie Charlesworth considered the native title holders' 12 arguments.

She found that when the Pastoral Land Board ultimately approved a permit covering about 60,000 hectares — an area far larger than what was applied for — it "exceeded its jurisdiction".

"The circumstances in which that came about are not at all clear," she said.

She also found there had been no comprehensive environmental impact assessment done of the entire area and that the board "failed to comply with its obligation to afford procedural fairness" to native title holders.

Justice Charlesworth declared the permit invalid largely on those points, and ordered the board to reassess the application "according to law", which means a new permit could be issued in future.

The native title holders also argued the permit did not qualify as "farm tourism" under section 24GB of the Native Title Act, as there was "no substantive connection to pastoral activities".

Justice Charlesworth said she was informed the matter was the first time a court had been forced to consider the section — which allows certain activities like farm tourism or running cattle to go ahead on pastoral land without agreement from native title holders, but rules out other types of tourism involving observing Aboriginal activities or cultural works.

She noted there was "public interest in the resolution of the issue given the likelihood that it may arise again", with large swathes of the NT and South Australia covered by pastoral leases.

However, Justice Charlesworth rejected the argument, finding the activities on offer at Lorella Springs "all fall within the phrase 'farm tourism activities'."

The native title holders also argued the permit was invalid because it permitted "tourism activities that involved observing the activities or cultural works of Aboriginal people".

Justice Charlesworth "unreservedly" accepted evidence about the "hurt and distress" felt by native title holders over how tourism at Lorella Springs could impact sacred sites, but ultimately dismissed that argument as well.

"The focus of [section] 24GB is upon what has been authorised by the Board, not upon what may happen in the future by reason of feared unauthorised actions of the [owners] or tourists," she said.

Justice Charlesworth upheld the water licence, ruling she was not satisfied it would affect native title because there was no evidence the amount of water extracted would affect native title holders' ability to take water.

NLC chair Matthew Ryan called the judgement a "hard fought win" for native title holders.

"Protecting sacred sites is protecting culture. It is always necessary to work with the caretakers of precious country to keep these sacred areas safe," he said.

A spokesperson for the NT government did not respond to questions about whether Lorella Springs would re-open in the future but said it "will take the time to carefully consider the Federal Court's decision."