Muldowney v Australian Electoral Commission [1993] HCA 32

Petitioner was not qualified to vote at disputed elections as his name was not on the Roll for any Division at relevant times; therefore, petitions did not comply with s. 355(c) Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 and no proceedings could be had.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Procedural Posture: Petition to Court of Disputed Returns / Final Determination; Dismissal Order
Outcome: petitions dismissed
Legal Topics: ['qualification to Vote' 'court of Disputed Returns Jurisdiction' 'illegal Practices Under Electoral Law']

['electoral Law' 'constitutional Law'] ['qualification to Vote' 'court of Disputed Returns Jurisdiction' 'illegal Practices Under Electoral Law']

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

Procedural Posture

Petition to Court of Disputed Returns / Final Determination; Dismissal Order

Legal Issues

1 ["Whether petitioner was 'qualified to vote' under s. 355(c) Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 at relevant elections" 'Whether Court of Disputed Returns has jurisdiction to void general elections or elections for divisions where petitioner not enrolled' 'Whether actions based on s. 329A Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 could constitute illegal practice if section not declared invalid']

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

petitions dismissed

Orders

['Petition No. C9 of 1993 dismissed under s. 360(1)(viii) Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918' 'Petition No. C10 of 1993 dismissed under s. 360(1)(viii) Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918' 'No order as to costs']