Judgments, ordered by date

Browsing By Year (2018)

Now Showing items 15 to 34  Previous Page   Next Page

Jump to page of 3


Federal Commissioner of Taxation v Thomas [2018] HCA 31

Kiefel CJ, Bell, Gageler, Keane, Nettle, Gordon, Edelman JJ
Date: 8 Aug 2018 Case Number: B60/2017 B61/2017 B62/2017 B63/2017
Taxation – Division 207 in Pt 3-6 of Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (Cth) – Where trustee passed resolutions purporting to distribute franking credits to beneficiaries of trust separately from and in different proportions to income comprising franked distributions – Where directions made by Supreme Court of Queensland pursuant to s 96 of Trusts Act 1973 (Q) concerning the resolutions – Whether directions determined against Commissioner of Taxation the application of Div 207.

Words and phrases – "deemed assessment", "determine conclusively", "directions", "franked distribution", "franking credit", "imputation credit", "income tax return", "judicial advice", "notice of amended assessment", "notionally allocated", "streaming", "tax offset".

Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 (Cth) – ss 95, 97.

Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (Cth) – Div 207.

Taxation Administration Act 1953 (Cth) – Pt IVC.

Trusts Act 1973 (Q) – s 96.

Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v SZVFW [2018] HCA 30

Kiefel CJ, Gageler, Nettle, Gordon, Edelman JJ
Date: 8 Aug 2018 Case Number: S244/2017
Migration – Refugee Review Tribunal – Review of decisions – Where first and second respondents sought review by Refugee Review Tribunal ("Tribunal") of decision of delegate of appellant to refuse applications for protection visas – Where respondents failed to respond to invitations from Tribunal to appear or provide submissions – Where s 426A(1) of Migration Act 1958 (Cth) empowered Tribunal to proceed to make decision on review without taking further action to allow or enable respondents to appear – Where Tribunal made decision to proceed under s 426A(1) – Whether Tribunal's decision to proceed in absence of respondents was legally unreasonable.

Appeal – Rehearing – Where primary judge held decision of Tribunal was legally unreasonable – Where Full Court of Federal Court dismissed appeal from primary judge's decision, holding that appellant was required to demonstrate error in reasoning of primary judge akin to that required in appeals from discretionary judgments – Whether principles stated in House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499 apply to appeal from decision on judicial review that administrative decision is legally unreasonable.

Words and phrases – "appeal by way of rehearing", "appealable error", "discretionary", "discretionary decision", "discretionary power", "evaluative approach", "evaluative judgment", "evaluative process", "legally unreasonable", "standard of appellate review", "unreasonable".

Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – ss 425, 425A, 426A, 441A, 441C, 476.

Lane v The Queen [2018] HCA 28

Kiefel CJ, Bell, Gageler, Keane, Edelman JJ
Date: 20 Jun 2018 Case Number: S308/2017
Criminal law – Appeal against conviction – Application of proviso – Where appellant convicted of manslaughter – Where either of two acts of appellant may have caused death of deceased – Where trial judge erred in failing to direct jury as to requirement that it be unanimous as to specific act causing death – Whether "no substantial miscarriage of justice has actually occurred" – Whether absence of unanimity direction precluded application of proviso.

Words and phrases – "fundamental defect", "nature and effect of the error", "presuppositions of the trial", "proviso", "reasonable doubt", "substantial miscarriage of justice", "unanimity direction", "unanimous".

Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) – s 6(1).

Minogue v Victoria [2018] HCA 27

Kiefel CJ, Bell, Gageler, Keane, Nettle, Gordon, Edelman JJ
Date: 20 Jun 2018 Case Number: M2/2017
Criminal law – Parole – Where s 74AAA of Corrections Act 1986 (Vic) imposes conditions for making parole order for prisoner convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for murder of person who prisoner knew was, or was reckless as to whether person was, police officer – Where s 127A inserted into Corrections Act 1986 (Vic) stating s 74AAA applies regardless of whether prior to commencement of s 74AAA prisoner became eligible for parole, prisoner took steps to ask Adult Parole Board of Victoria ("Board") to grant parole, or Board began consideration of whether prisoner should be granted parole – Where prior to commencement of s 74AAA and s 127A plaintiff became eligible for parole and applied for parole and Board began consideration of whether plaintiff should be granted parole – Whether s 74AAA and s 127A apply to plaintiff.

Words and phrases – "non-parole period", "parole", "recklessness", "sentencing", "statutory construction".

Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Vic) – ss 10, 22, 28, 31, 32.

Corrections Act 1986 (Vic) – ss 74AAA, 127A.

Crimes Act 1958 (Vic) – s 3.

DL v The Queen [2018] HCA 26

Kiefel CJ, Bell, Keane, Nettle, Edelman JJ
Date: 20 Jun 2018 Case Number: A38/2017
Criminal law – Trial by judge alone – Adequacy of reasons – Where appellant convicted of "[p]ersistent sexual exploitation of a child" – Where offence comprised of two or more acts of sexual exploitation separated by not less than three days – Where complainant alleged various acts of sexual exploitation over many years – Where alleged inconsistencies and implausibilities in complainant's evidence – Where trial judge regarded complainant as reliable witness as to "core allegations" – Whether trial judge's reasons inadequate because failed to identify two or more acts constituting offence – Whether trial judge's reasons inadequate because failed to explain process of reasoning.

Words and phrases – "adequacy of reasons", "basis for decision", "conflict between evidence", "credibility", "inadequacy of reasons", "inconsistencies in evidence", "process of reasoning", "reasons", "trial by judge alone".

Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA) – s 50(1).

Trkulja v Google LLC [2018] HCA 25

Kiefel CJ, Bell, Keane, Nettle, Gordon JJ
Date: 13 Jun 2018 Case Number: M88/2017
Defamation – Publication – Capacity to defame – Where application for summary dismissal of defamation proceeding – Where allegedly defamatory matter includes search results of internet search engine – Where allegedly defamatory matter includes autocomplete predictions of internet search engine – Whether respondent published allegedly defamatory matter – Whether matter capable of conveying allegedly defamatory imputations – Whether proceeding had no real prospect of success.

Words and phrases – "autocomplete", "capacity to defame", "composite publication", "defamation", "defamatory image", "no real prospect of success", "ordinary reasonable person", "publication", "search engine", "search results", "search terms", "summary dismissal", "summary judgment".

Civil Procedure Act 2010 (Vic) – ss 62, 63.

Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2005 (Vic) – rr 7. 01, 8. 09.

CRI028 v The Republic of Nauru [2018] HCA 24

Bell, Gordon, Edelman JJ
Date: 13 Jun 2018 Case Number: M66/2017
Migration – Refugees – Appeal as of right from Supreme Court of Nauru –Where Secretary of Department of Justice and Border Control determined appellant not refugee – Where Refugee Status Review Tribunal affirmed Secretary's determination – Where appellant established well-founded fear of persecution – Where Tribunal found alternative "home area" – Whether Tribunal properly applied internal relocation principle – Whether Tribunal failed to consider family unity – Whether Supreme Court erred in affirming Tribunal's determination.

Words and phrases – "family unity", "home area", "in all the circumstances", "internal relocation principle", "reasonableness of relocation", "relocation".

Appeals Act 1972 (Nr) – s 44.

Nauru (High Court Appeals) Act 1976 (Cth) – s 5, Sched, Art 1.

Refugees Convention Act 2012 (Nr) – ss 3, 4, 5, 6, 22, 31, 34, 43, 44.

Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (1951) as modified by the Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees (1967) – Art 1A(2).

Rozenblit v Vainer [2018] HCA 23

Kiefel CJ, Bell, Keane, Gordon, Edelman JJ
Date: 13 Jun 2018 Case Number: M114/2017
Practice and procedure – Victoria – Stay of proceeding – Where appellant commenced proceeding in Supreme Court of Victoria – Where appellant made applications for leave to file and serve amended statement of claim – Where applications refused with costs taxed immediately – Where costs unpaid because appellant impecunious – Where appellant made further application – Where leave to amend statement of claim granted but proceeding stayed under Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2015 (Vic) r 63. 03(3) until interlocutory costs orders paid – Whether primary judge erred in making order to stay proceedings.

Words and phrases – "conduct which falls for condemnation", "costs taxed immediately", "impecunious", "interlocutory costs order", "only practical way to ensure justice between the parties", "stay of proceeding", "strong grounds".

Civil Procedure Act 2010 (Vic) – ss 7, 8, 9, 65C, 65E.

Supreme Court Act 1986 (Vic) – ss 24, 25.

Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2015 (Vic) – rr 63. 03(3), 63. 20. 1.

Amaca Pty Limited v Latz [2018] HCA 22

Kiefel CJ, Bell, Gageler, Keane, Nettle, Gordon, Edelman JJ
Date: 13 Jun 2018 Case Number: A8/2018 A7/2018
Negligence – Personal injury – Damages – Assessment of present value of future loss – Where claimant diagnosed with terminal malignant mesothelioma post-retirement – Where claimant's life expectancy reduced – Where claimant receiving superannuation pension under Superannuation Act 1988 (SA) and age pension under Social Security Act 1991 (Cth) – Whether superannuation pension entitlement which would have been received during remainder of pre-illness life expectancy compensable loss – Whether age pension entitlement which would have been received during remainder of pre-illness life expectancy compensable loss – Whether reversionary pension payable under s 38(1)(a) of Superannuation Act to partner on claimant's death should be deducted from damages award.

Words and phrases – "age pension", "capital asset", "compensable loss", "compensatory principle", "loss of earning capacity", "lost years", "net present value", "offsetting or collateral benefit", "pension", "pre-illness life expectancy", "reversionary pension", "superannuation pension".

Social Security Act 1991 (Cth) – Pt 2. 2.

Superannuation Act 1988 (SA) – Pt 5.

EMP144 v The Republic of Nauru [2018] HCA 21

Keifel CJ, Gageler, Nettle JJ
Date: 16 May 2018 Case Number: M151/2017
Migration – Refugees – Appeal as of right from Supreme Court of Nauru – Where Secretary of Department of Justice and Border Control of Nauru ("Secretary") determined appellant not refugee under Refugees Convention Act 2012 (Nr) – Where Secretary determined Nauru did not owe appellant complementary protection under Refugees Convention Act – Where Refugee Status Review Tribunal ("Tribunal") affirmed Secretary's determinations on basis appellant could reasonably relocate within country of origin – Where Supreme Court of Nauru affirmed Tribunal's decision – Whether appellant's ability reasonably to relocate within country of origin relevant to claim for complementary protection – Whether Tribunal failed to raise issue of whether appellant could reasonably relocate – Whether Tribunal failed to take into account factors relevant to appellant's ability reasonably to relocate – Whether Tribunal misunderstood country information.

Words and phrases – "complementary protection", "country information", "internal relocation", "reasonable internal relocation", "refugee", "well-founded fear of persecution".

Convention against Torture and Other Cruel – Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (1984), Art 3.

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966) – Arts 6, 7.

Nauru (High Court Appeals) Act 1976 (Cth) – s 5.

Refugees Convention Act 2012 (Nr) – ss 4, 22(b), 34(4), 40(1), 43.

DWN027 v The Republic of Nauru [2018] HCA 20

Kiefel CJ, Gageler, Nettle JJ
Date: 16 May 2018 Case Number: M145/2017
Migration – Refugees – Appeal as of right from Supreme Court of Nauru – Where Secretary of Department of Justice and Border Control of Nauru ("Secretary") determined appellant not refugee under Refugees Convention Act 2012 (Nr) – Where Secretary determined Nauru did not owe appellant complementary protection under Refugees Convention Act – Where Refugee Status Review Tribunal ("Tribunal") affirmed Secretary's determinations on basis appellant could reasonably relocate within country of origin – Where Supreme Court of Nauru affirmed Tribunal's decision – Whether appellant's ability reasonably to relocate within country of origin relevant to claim for complementary protection – Whether Tribunal failed to take into account factors relevant to appellant's ability reasonably to relocate – Whether Tribunal required under Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) to give primary consideration to best interests of appellant's child.

Words and phrases – "best interests of children", "best interests of the child", "complementary protection", "internal relocation", "reasonable internal relocation", "reasonable relocation", "refugee", "well-founded fear of persecution".

Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) – Arts 2, 3(1).

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966).

Nauru (High Court Appeals) Act 1976 (Cth)
– s 5.

Refugees Convention Act 2012 (Nr) – ss 4, 43.

CRI026 v The Republic of Nauru [2018] HCA 19

Kiefel CJ, Gageler, Nettle JJ
Date: 16 May 2018 Case Number: M131/2017
Migration – Refugees – Appeal as of right from Supreme Court of Nauru – Where Secretary of Department of Justice and Border Control of Nauru ("Secretary") determined appellant not refugee under Refugees Convention Act 2012 (Nr) – Where Secretary determined Nauru did not owe appellant complementary protection under Refugees Convention Act – Where Refugee Status Review Tribunal ("Tribunal") affirmed Secretary's determinations on basis appellant could reasonably relocate within country of origin to place where persecutors had little or no influence or power – Where Tribunal's reasons contained typographical error – Where Tribunal issued corrigendum correcting error – Where Supreme Court of Nauru affirmed Tribunal's decision – Whether appellant's ability reasonably to relocate within country of origin relevant to claim for complementary protection – Whether typographical error in Tribunal's reasons disclosed error – Whether ability of appellant's family reasonably to relocate relevant to assessing appellant's ability reasonably to relocate – Whether Tribunal erred in failing to consider whether appellant's family able reasonably to relocate in assessing appellant's ability reasonably to relocate – Whether Tribunal's finding that persecutors had little or no influence or power in place of relocation supported by evidence.

Words and phrases – "complementary protection", "corrigendum", "freedom of movement", "internal flight alternative", "internal relocation", "non-refoulement", "reasonable internal relocation", "reasonable relocation", "refugee", "subsidiary protection", "typographical error", "well-founded fear of persecution".

Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (1951) as modified by the Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees (1967) – Art 1A(2).

Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (1950) – Art 3.

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966) – Arts 2, 6, 7, 12.

Nauru (High Court Appeals) Act 1976 (Cth) – s 5.

Refugees Convention Act 2012 (Nr) – ss 3, 4, 43.

Collins v The Queen [2018] HCA 18

Kiefel CJ, Bell, Keane, Gordon, Edelman JJ
Date: 9 May 2018 Case Number: B68/2017
Criminal law – Appeal against convictions – Jury direction – Prior inconsistent statement – Where appellant indicted for indecent assault, aggravated indecent assault and rape – Where consent main issue at trial – Where complainant made preliminary complaints to mother and others – Where mother gave evidence at committal hearing – Where mother gave different account at trial – Where trial judge directed jury committal evidence could only be used to assess mother's credibility – Where mother confirmed at trial she had given that evidence at committal and her memory was better at committal – Whether mother actually adopted committal evidence – Whether prior inconsistent statement available to jury to assess complainant's credibility – Whether trial judge misdirected jury.

Criminal law – Appeal against convictions – Application of proviso – Where Court of Appeal found erroneous jury direction – Where prosecution disavowed reliance on proviso – Where Court of Appeal applied proviso without notice and notwithstanding disavowal – Whether Court of Appeal bound to put appellant on notice of possibility of applying proviso.

Words and phrases – "preliminary complaint", "prior inconsistent statement", "proviso", "substantial miscarriage of justice".

Criminal Code (Q) – ss 337, 349, 352, 668E(1A).

Re Gallagher [2018] HCA 17

Kiefel CJ, Bell, Gageler, Keane, Nettle, Gordon, Edelman JJ
Date: 9 May 2018 Case Number: C32/2017
Constitutional law (Cth) – Parliamentary elections – Senate – Questions referred to Court of Disputed Returns by Senate – Where senator was foreign citizen at date of nomination for election – Where renunciation of foreign citizenship registered after return as duly elected senator – Whether senator disqualified by reason of s 44(i) of Constitution because of foreign citizenship – Whether foreign law irremediably prevented participation in representative government.

Words and phrases – "a subject or a citizen … of a foreign power", "constitutional imperative", "incapable of being chosen", "irremediably prevent".

Constitution – s 44(i).

Plaintiff M174/2016 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] HCA 16

Gageler, Keane, Nettle, Gordon, Edelman JJ
Date: 18 Apr 2018 Case Number: M174/2016
Migration – Pt 2 Div 3 subdiv AB of Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – Where plaintiff applied for protection visa – Where plaintiff claimed real chance of harm due to being Christian – Where plaintiff claimed to attend church regularly – Where delegate of Minister for Immigration and Border Protection called reverend of church and reverend provided information on plaintiff's attendance at church – Where delegate did not provide plaintiff with information provided by reverend or invite plaintiff to comment on it – Where delegate refused to grant protection visa to plaintiff – Whether delegate failed to comply with s 57(2) of Migration Act.

Migration – Pt 7AA of Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – Where plaintiff "fast track review applicant" within meaning of Migration Act – Whether decision affected by jurisdictional error because of failure to comply with s 57(2) a "fast track reviewable decision" within meaning of Pt 7AA – Where "new information" defined as documents or information not before Minister when deciding to refuse to grant protection visa that Immigration Assessment Authority considers may be relevant – Power of Authority to get new information – Power of Authority to consider new information – Obligation of Authority to invite applicant to comment on new information – Nature of review by Authority – Whether Authority's decision not to interview plaintiff and certain other persons or to have regard to certain information provided by plaintiff legally unreasonable.

Words and phrases – "condition of valid performance", "decision", "decision that is made in fact", "de novo consideration of the merits", "exceptional circumstances", "fast track reviewable decision", "jurisdictional error", "legally effective decision", "legally unreasonable", "new information", "not a valid decision", "not previously known", "personal information", "relevant information", "review material", "unreasonable failure to exercise power", "would be the reason, or part of the reason for refusing to grant a visa".

Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – ss 5, 46A, 54, 55, 56, 57, 69, Pt 7AA.

Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) – reg 4. 43.

Burns v Corbett [2018] HCA 15

Kiefel CJ, Bell, Gageler, Keane, Nettle, Gordon, Edelman JJ
Date: 18 Apr 2018 Case Number: S183/2017 S185/2017 S186/2017 S187/2017 S188/2017
Constitutional law (Cth) – Chapter III – Where complaints made under Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW) came before Civil and Administrative Tribunal of New South Wales ("NCAT") – Where parties to disputes residents of different States – Where common ground that NCAT exercised State judicial power in hearing and determining disputes – Where common ground that NCAT not a "court of a State" – Whether Ch III of Constitution contains implication preventing any party to federal compact from conferring adjudicative authority in respect of matters listed in ss 75 and 76 of Constitution on organ of government, federal or State, other than a court referred to in Ch III.

Constitutional law (Cth) – Inconsistency between Commonwealth and State laws – Where Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) purports to confer jurisdiction on NCAT to determine disputes between residents of different States – Whether State law alters, impairs or detracts from operation of Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), s 39(2).

Words and phrases – "adjudicative authority", "administrative tribunal", "alter, impair or detract", "belongs to or is invested in", "constitutional implication", "court", "court of a State", "diversity jurisdiction", "federal Judicature", "federal jurisdiction", "inconsistency", "integrated national court system", "judicial power", "jurisdiction", "matter", "negative implication", "residents of different States", "State jurisdiction".

Constitution – Ch III, ss 51(xxxix), 71, 73(ii), 75, 76, 77, 106, 107, 108, 109.

Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) – ss 38, 39.

Anti –Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW), ss 49ZT, 114.

Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) – ss 28(2), 29(1), 32.

Interpretation Act 1987 (NSW) – s 31.

WET044 v The Republic of Nauru [2018] HCA 14

Kiefel CJ, Gageler, Keane JJ
Date: 11 Apr 2018 Case Number: M132/2017
Migration – Refugees – Appeal as of right from Supreme Court of Nauru – Where Secretary of Nauru Department of Justice and Border Control determined appellant not refugee and not entitled to complementary protection – Where Refugee Status Review Tribunal affirmed Secretary's determination – Where Tribunal adopted reasoning of Secretary – Whether Tribunal failed to consider country information before it – Whether Tribunal acted in way that was procedurally unfair by failing to put to appellant nature and content of country information it relied upon.

Words and phrases – "appeal", "country information", "procedural fairness".

Appeals Act 1972 (Nr) – s 44(a).

Refugees Convention Act 2012 (Nr).

Clone Pty Ltd v Players Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) (Receivers & Managers Appointed) [2018] HCA 12

Kiefel CJ, Gageler, Keane, Gordon, Edelman JJ
Date: 21 Mar 2018 Case Number: A22/2017 A23/2017
Equity – Where judgment given by Supreme Court of South Australia, as varied by Full Court of Supreme Court of South Australia – Where successful party engaged in malpractice – Where malpractice later discovered – Where perfected judgment set aside – Where no pleading or proof of fraud – Nature of court's equitable power to set aside perfected judgment – Whether equitable power extends to malpractice not amounting to fraud – Whether power to set aside perfected judgment conditional upon unsuccessful party having exercised reasonable diligence to discover fraud or malpractice.

Procedure – Perfected judgment – Rescission – Where two applications brought to set aside judgment – Where judgment set aside for malpractice – Whether proper course application in original proceeding or fresh action.

Words and phrases – "actual fraud", "causation", "equitable jurisdiction", "equitable power", "equity", "finality", "fraud", "fresh action", "malpractice", "misconduct", "new trial", "not amounting to fraud", "perfected judgment", "perfected orders", "power", "proper application", "reasonable diligence", "setting aside".

Supreme Court Act 1935 (SA) – s 17(2)(a)(i).

Alley v Gillespie [2018] HCA 11

Kiefel CJ, Bell, Gageler, Keane, Nettle, Gordon, Edelman JJ
Date: 21 Mar 2018 Case Number: S190/2017
Constitutional law (Cth) – Parliamentary elections – Common informer action – Where plaintiff commenced common informer action in original jurisdiction of High Court – Where liability to penalty under Common Informers (Parliamentary Disqualifications) Act 1975 (Cth) requires determination of whether defendant incapable of sitting as member of House of Representatives – Whether High Court has jurisdiction to determine eligibility of member of House of Representatives in common informer action – Proper construction of s 46 of Constitution – Proper construction of s 47 of Constitution.

Words and phrases – "common informer", "common informer action", "Court of Disputed Returns", "declared by the Constitution", "declared by this Constitution", "exclusive cognisance", "incapable of being chosen or of sitting", "jurisdiction", "until the Parliament otherwise provides".

Constitution – ss 44(v), 45, 46, 47, 49.

Common Informers (Parliamentary Disqualifications) Act 1975 (Cth) – s 3.

Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 (Cth) – s 376.

Re Kakoschke-Moore [2018] HCA 10

Kiefel CJ, Bell, Gageler, Keane, Nettle, Gordon, Edelman JJ
Date: 21 Mar 2018 Case Number: C30/2017
Constitutional law (Cth) – Parliamentary elections – Reference to Court of Disputed Returns – Where Ms Skye Kakoschke-Moore and Mr Timothy Storer nominated for election as senator for State of South Australia as nominees of Nick Xenophon Team ("NXT") – Where Ms Kakoschke-Moore listed as third of four in order of NXT candidates, before Mr Storer – Where Ms Kakoschke-Moore returned as elected – Where Ms Kakoschke-Moore was British citizen at time of nomination – Where Ms Kakoschke-Moore subsequently renounced British citizenship – Where Mr Storer ceased to be member of NXT – Where Ms Kakoschke-Moore held incapable of being chosen or of sitting by reason of s 44(i) of Constitution – Whether vacancy in Senate should be filled by declaring Ms Kakoschke-Moore as elected – Whether Ms Kakoschke-Moore should be included in special count – Whether Mr Storer should be excluded from special count.

Words and phrases – "above the line", "electoral choice", "electoral process", "incapable of being chosen or of sitting", "political party", "process of being chosen", "special count", "true legal intent of the voters".

Constitution – ss 15, 44.

Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 (Cth) – ss 162, 166, 168, 169, 181(2), 239, 269, 272, 360(1)(vi), 376.

Now Showing items 15 to 34  Previous Page   Next Page

Back to the top