Electoral Commissioner v McQuestin
Case
•
[2024] FCA 287
•26 March 2024
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Electoral Commissioner v McQuestin [2024] FCA 287
[2024] FCA 287
26 March 2024
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In this case, the Electoral Commissioner brought an action against Charles David McQuestin for contraventions of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 (Cth), specifically s 321D(5). Mr McQuestin, the State Director of the Victorian Division of the Liberal Party of Australia during the 2022 federal election campaign, failed to ensure that particulars in three newspaper advertisements published in the Geelong Advertiser were legible at a distance at which the communication was intended to be read. The primary legal issue was the determination of the appropriate form of declarations of contraventions and the calculation of civil penalties. The court had to decide whether each publication of a contravening advertisement constituted a separate contravention or if the contraventions were part of a single course of conduct.
The court found that Mr McQuestin's principal culpability arose at the time the contravening advertisements were approved. It held that the number of publications of the advertisements by the Geelong Advertiser was a relevant factor but should be seen as part of a single course of conduct. Consequently, the court imposed aggregate penalties, applying the course of conduct and totality principles. The court concluded that an overall aggregate penalty of $40,000 was appropriate. The court ordered Mr McQuestin to pay the penalty and the costs of the proceeding, subject to the possibility of variation by either party within a specified timeframe.
The court found that Mr McQuestin's principal culpability arose at the time the contravening advertisements were approved. It held that the number of publications of the advertisements by the Geelong Advertiser was a relevant factor but should be seen as part of a single course of conduct. Consequently, the court imposed aggregate penalties, applying the course of conduct and totality principles. The court concluded that an overall aggregate penalty of $40,000 was appropriate. The court ordered Mr McQuestin to pay the penalty and the costs of the proceeding, subject to the possibility of variation by either party within a specified timeframe.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Elections
Legal Concepts
-
Legitimate Expectation
-
Statutory Interpretation
-
Civil Penalty
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Laming v Electoral Commissioner of the Australian Electoral Commission [2025] HCA 31
Cases Cited
17
Statutory Material Cited
7
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
[2006] FCA 1730