Wiltshire, Tony v Turnball, Malcolm & Ors [1998] FCA 10

Wiltshire, Tony v Turnball, Malcolm & Ors [1998] FCA 10

The petition failed because the preparation and distribution of the liftout was not part of the conduct of the election, Malcolm Turnbull's limited role in preparing a synopsis and Doug Sutherland's lack of involvement did not breach s 52, there was no evidence of undue influence by either successful candidate, and nothing in the liftout or synopses was likely to mislead or deceive an elector in relation to casting a vote. The facts pleaded also did not establish any statutory ground for avoiding the elections.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 January 1998
Procedural Posture
Petition Disputing Election Under the Constitutional Convention (election) Act 1997 (cth) / Hearing of Petition and Motions by Malcolm Turnbull and Doug Sutherland Seeking Dismissal of the Petition
Outcome
Petition dismissed; question of costs reserved.
Legal Topics
['constitutional Convention Election' 'illegal Practices' 'undue Influence' 'misleading or Deceptive Electoral Matter' 'particularity of Election Petition' 'amendment of Election Petition']
['election Law' 'constitutional Law'] ['constitutional Convention Election' 'illegal Practices' 'undue Influence' 'misleading or Deceptive Electoral Matter' 'particularity of Election Petition' 'amendment of Election Petition']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Petition Disputing Election Under the Constitutional Convention (election) Act 1997 (cth) / Hearing of Petition and Motions by Malcolm Turnbull and Doug Sutherland Seeking Dismissal of the Petition

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Malcolm Turnbull and Doug Sutherland took part in the conduct of the election contrary to s 52 of the Constitutional Convention (Election) Act 1997 (Cth).' 'Whether Malcolm Turnbull and Doug Sutherland committed or attempted to commit undue influence within the meaning of the Act.' 'Whether the Commonwealth liftout was likely to mislead or deceive electors in relation to the casting of a vote contrary to s 126(1) of the Act.' 'Whether the petition set out facts with sufficient particularity to justify invalidating the elections.' 'Whether the petition could be amended after the statutory filing period.']

Ratio Decidendi

The petition failed because the preparation and distribution of the liftout was not part of the conduct of the election, Malcolm Turnbull's limited role in preparing a synopsis and Doug Sutherland's lack of involvement did not breach s 52, there was no evidence of undue influence by either successful candidate, and nothing in the liftout or synopses was likely to mislead or deceive an elector in relation to casting a vote. The facts pleaded also did not establish any statutory ground for avoiding the elections.

Court Disposition

Petition dismissed; question of costs reserved.

Orders

  • ['The petition be dismissed.']