Skyring, Alan George v Australian Electoral Commission [1998] FCA 1587

Skyring, Alan George v Australian Electoral Commission [1998] FCA 1587

The application was dismissed because it was brought primarily to obtain information rather than to seek meaningful review of a decision, making it an abuse of process, and because its grounds based on the applicant's monetary-system arguments were frivolous and vexatious. Candidates who paid the nomination deposit by bank cheque complied with s 170(3) of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 (Cth), and any challenge to electoral outcomes had to be brought by petition under s 352 of that Act.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 December 1998
Procedural Posture
Application to Review a Decision of the Australian Electoral Commissioner; Respondent's Motion to Dismiss / Directions Hearing
Outcome
Application dismissed; applicant ordered to pay the respondent's costs of the application, including reserved costs.
Legal Topics
['abuse of Process' 'frivolous and Vexatious Proceedings' 'federal Election Nomination Deposits' 'australian Currency and Legal Tender']
['administrative Law' 'electoral Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['abuse of Process' 'frivolous and Vexatious Proceedings' 'federal Election Nomination Deposits' 'australian Currency and Legal Tender']

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

Application to Review a Decision of the Australian Electoral Commissioner; Respondent's Motion to Dismiss / Directions Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the application to review a decision of the Australian Electoral Commissioner was commenced for an improper purpose and constituted an abuse of process.' 'Whether the application should be dismissed under O 20 r 2 as frivolous and vexatious.' 'Whether candidates who paid House of Representatives nomination deposits by bank cheque complied with s 170(3) of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 (Cth).' "Whether the applicant's arguments about the Australian monetary system provided any arguable basis to challenge the validity of paper money, cheques, nomination deposits, or electoral outcomes."]

Ratio Decidendi

The application was dismissed because it was brought primarily to obtain information rather than to seek meaningful review of a decision, making it an abuse of process, and because its grounds based on the applicant's monetary-system arguments were frivolous and vexatious. Candidates who paid the nomination deposit by bank cheque complied with s 170(3) of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 (Cth), and any challenge to electoral outcomes had to be brought by petition under s 352 of that Act.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; applicant ordered to pay the respondent's costs of the application, including reserved costs.

Orders

  • ['The application is dismissed.' "The applicant is to pay the respondent's costs of the application, including reserved costs."]