Day v Australian Electoral Officer for the State of South Australia & Anor

The applicant, Mr. Day, sought judicial review of a decision by the Australian Electoral Officer for the State of South Australia and the Australian Electoral Commission. The dispute concerned the validity of Mr. Day's enrolment as an elector for the Division of Makin in South Australia. Mr. Day had been enrolled on the basis of his residential address at a property in Adelaide, but he also maintained a residence in Queensland. The Electoral Officer had formed the view that Mr. Day was not entitled to be enrolled for the Division of Makin, as he believed Mr. Day was enrolled for another division in Queensland. The matter came before the High Court of Australia.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether Mr. Day was entitled to be enrolled as an elector for the Division of Makin, notwithstanding his other residential connection in Queensland. This required the Court to consider the interpretation of the provisions of the *Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918* (Cth) concerning enrolment and the determination of a person's "place of living" for the purposes of enrolment. Specifically, the Court had to determine whether the Electoral Officer had correctly applied the relevant statutory criteria in concluding that Mr. Day was not entitled to be enrolled in South Australia.

French CJ, applying the principles of statutory interpretation, found that the *Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918* (Cth) requires an elector to have a "place of living" within a particular division to be enrolled for that division. The Act further provides that if an elector has more than one place of living, the place of living is that which is the "real home" of the elector. His Honour concluded that the Electoral Officer had erred in law by failing to properly consider the evidence regarding Mr. Day's "real home" and by incorrectly applying the statutory test. The Court found that Mr. Day's evidence established that his "real home" was in South Australia, and therefore he was entitled to be enrolled for the Division of Makin.

The High Court ordered that the decision of the Australian Electoral Officer for the State of South Australia be quashed and that the matter be remitted to the Australian Electoral Officer for reconsideration according to law.