Cusack, Patrick Leo v Australian Electoral Commissioner [1984] FCA 400

Cusack, Patrick Leo v Australian Electoral Commissioner [1984] FCA 400

A decision refusing to accept an election nomination in the absence of the required deposit, made according to sub-section 170(c)(ii) of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918, is lawful. Arguments that the Act is invalid due to inconsistency with Magna Carta or general statutory rights do not invalidate the...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Applicant: Patrick Leo Cusack; Respondent: Australian Electoral Commissioner
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 November 1984
Procedural Posture
Application for Order of Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Judicial Review of Electoral Decision, Statutory Interpretation, Conflict With Magna Carta
Administrative Law Electoral Law Judicial Review of Electoral Decision Statutory Interpretation Conflict With Magna Carta

Source-derived case record

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Patrick Leo Cusack

Applicant

Australian Electoral Commissioner

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Order of Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether decision to reject nomination absent deposit was made according to law
  2. 2 Whether Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 provisions are invalid for inconsistency with Magna Carta or other rights
  3. 3 Whether there was a breach of natural justice

Ratio Decidendi

A decision refusing to accept an election nomination in the absence of the required deposit, made according to sub-section 170(c)(ii) of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918, is lawful. Arguments that the Act is invalid due to inconsistency with Magna Carta or general statutory rights do not invalidate the requirements of the Electoral Act.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application dismissed
  • Applicant to pay respondent's costs to be taxed, including reserved costs if any