Fortescue controversies
Controversies tied to this brand in public sources. A listing is not a finding of fault.
Back to profile5 entries
2026
Yindjibarndi native-title compensation judgment
The Federal Court issued judgment in Yindjibarndi Ngurra Aboriginal Corporation RNTBC v State of Western Australia (No 2), concerning compensation for economic, cultural and spiritual loss associated with acts affecting native title in the Solomon area. Fortescue companies were respondents in the proceeding.
2021
Fortescue clears land at a heritage site without community representatives present
Issue disclosure
Fortescue cleared land in the Weelumurra Creek area on 1 February without the community representatives required by a government condition being present. The company said an administrative error led to the work occurring earlier than scheduled. It apologized to the Wintawari Guruma Aboriginal Corporation, said it had investigated the matter, and paused clearing works at the site.
Company response
Apology — Fortescue
"I have spoken to Wintawari Guruma Aboriginal Corporation (WGAC) Chairman Glen Camille regarding this incident to personally express my regret and sincere apology on behalf of Fortescue," she said.
Investigation — Fortescue
"We have carried out a full investigation into the matter which has shown that this unfortunately occurred as a result of an administrative error... We have paused all clearing works at this site as we work with WGAC on the matter."
Source excerpt
Fortescue had state government permission to clear the land in the Weelumurra Creek area registered as sacred to the Wintawari Guruma people, on condition that community elders were present to perform salvage and cultural rites, four documents reviewed by Reuters showed.
"I have spoken to Wintawari Guruma Aboriginal Corporation (WGAC) Chairman Glen Camille regarding this incident to personally express my regret and sincere apology on behalf of Fortescue," she said.
"We have carried out a full investigation into the matter which has shown that this unfortunately occurred as a result of an administrative error... We have paused all clearing works at this site as we work with WGAC on the matter."
2019
Court dismisses Fortescue's appeal in Yindjibarndi native title case
Ruling
A Full Bench of the Federal Court dismissed Fortescue Metals Group's appeal against the native title decision granting the Yindjibarndi people exclusive rights over about 2,700 square kilometres of Pilbara land. Yindjibarndi representatives said they believed mining on the land had occurred without prior and informed consent. Fortescue said it was considering a High Court challenge and stated that the ruling did not materially affect its finances, mining tenure rights or current operations.
Company response
Clarification — Fortescue
“The matter of compensation is an entirely separate matter and our legal advice is consistent with our previous view that there is no material financial impact to Fortescue following today’s decision,” CEO Elizabeth Gaines said. “Our mining tenure rights and current operations are also unaffected.”
Source excerpt
Mining behemoth Fortescue Metals has lost its appeal against the native title decision which hands the Yindjibarndi people exclusive rights over 2700sq km of Pilbara land - including the Solomon mine.
In a statement this afternoon, Fortescue said they were considering a High Court challenge.
That prospect was brought into even sharper focus today, when an appeal against the ruling was also thrown out by a Full Bench of the Federal Court.
2011
ASIC misleading-conduct litigation
A Full Federal Court decision found that Fortescue and Andrew Forrest had made misleading representations concerning the binding nature of arrangements with Chinese entities. The High Court later overturned that decision in 2012, finding in favour of Fortescue and Forrest. ASIC challenged Fortescue and Andrew Forrest over public statements describing agreements with Chinese state-owned entities as binding contracts. The Full Federal Court initially found against the company and Forrest, but the High Court overturned that outcome in 2012.
2011
Yindjibarndi Solomon Hub dispute
The development of the Solomon Hub generated a long-running dispute with Yindjibarndi people concerning native-title rights, compensation, cultural heritage and the impact of mining on traditional Country. The dispute also involved divisions among local Aboriginal organisations during negotiations.