Electoral Commissioner of the Australian Electoral Commission v Laming [2024] FCAFC 109
Section 321D(5) of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 (Cth) is contravened on each occasion that electoral matter is communicated to a person without the required particulars; thus, a breach occurs each time a post is viewed by a separate individual. The scope of penalty should reflect the number of communications proved, taking into account any indicated course of conduct and moderation for the circumstances established in evidence. The appeal is allowed, the cross-appeal is dismissed, declarations and penalties are adjusted accordingly.
- Parties
- Appellant/cross Respondent: Electoral Commissioner of the Australian Electoral Commission; Respondent/cross Appellant: Andrew Laming
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 23 August 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Full Federal Court Judgment on Appeal and Cross Appeal
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed; cross-appeal and notice of contention dismissed; penalties and declarations adjusted.
- Legal Topics
- Authorisation of Electoral Matter, Pecuniary Penalties, Statutory Interpretation, Disclosure Obligations (elections), General and Specific Deterrence, Civil Penalty Regime
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Electoral Commissioner of the Australian Electoral Commission
Appellant/cross Respondent
Andrew Laming
Respondent/cross Appellant
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Full Federal Court Judgment on Appeal and Cross Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether s 321D(5) of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 (Cth) is contravened on each separate communication of electoral matter to a person or only once per act of publication
- 2 Proper construction of the obligation to include authorisation particulars with electoral matter under s 321D(5)
- 3 Appropriate penalty assessment for multiple breaches under the Electoral Act
Ratio Decidendi
Section 321D(5) of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 (Cth) is contravened on each occasion that electoral matter is communicated to a person without the required particulars; thus, a breach occurs each time a post is viewed by a separate individual. The scope of penalty should reflect the number of communications proved, taking into account any indicated course of conduct and moderation for the circumstances established in evidence. The appeal is allowed, the cross-appeal is dismissed, declarations and penalties are adjusted accordingly.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed; cross-appeal and notice of contention dismissed; penalties and declarations adjusted.
Orders
- The appeal be allowed.
- The cross-appeal and the notice of contention be dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment