CITATION: Insley -v- State Electoral Commissioner & ors [2000] NSWADT 90 DIVISION: General Division PARTIES: APPLICANT
Terry InsleyFIRST RESPONDENT
State Electoral CommissionerSECOND RESPONDENT
THIRD RESPONDENT
Returning Officer for Comenarra Ward, Ku-ring-gai Municipal Council
Elaine MalickiFILE NUMBER: 993230 HEARING DATES: 10/05/2000 SUBMISSIONS CLOSED: 05/10/2000 DATE OF DECISION:
07/17/2000BEFORE: Britton A - Judicial Member; Lees M - Judicial Member; Antonios Z - Member APPLICATION: Dismissal from civic office - Local Government Act - dismissal from civic office MATTER FOR DECISION: Principal matter LEGISLATION CITED: Local Government Act 1993 CASES CITED: R -v- Grey; Ex parte (1985) 157 CLR 351
Bourne-v- Murphy (1996) 92 LGERA 329
Sansom -v- Hudson (1997) 94 LGERA 292REPRESENTATION: APPLICANT
A Tudehope, barrister
1st & 2nd RESPONDENTS
D Stack, barrister
3rd RESPONDENT
S Klinger, solicitorORDERS: 1. That the third respondent be dismissed from her office as councillor of Ku-ring-gai Municipal Council.
REASONS FOR DECISION
1 This decision concerns an application brought under s329 of the Local Government Act (1993) (the Act) seeking an order that the third respondent, Elaine Malicki, be dismissed as a councillor of Ku-ring-gai Council (the Council).
2 The applicant, Terry Insley, was an unsuccessful candidate in the local council election for the Comenarra Ward of the Council. The applicant alleges that the second respondent, the returning officer, Mr PF Lewis wrongly declared a number of ballot papers as either formal and informal when in fact, they were respectively, informal and formal. This outcome asserts the applicant constitutes an irregularity under s 329(1)(a) of the Act and consequently the Tribunal must dismiss the third respondent from her office as a councillor of Ku-ring-gai Council.
Background
3 The election, the subject of this application was conducted under the Act and the Local Government (Elections) Regulations 1998 (the Regulations). The Act and Regulations prescribe in detail, the way in which local council elections are to be conducted.
4 The Act provides that local government elections are to be conducted by the Electoral Commissioner: s296(1). The Commissioner is required to appoint a returning officer to conduct the election on behalf of and under the direction of the Commissioner: s296(2). In turn the returning officer is to appoint one or more electoral officers: s296(3).
5 On 13 August 1999 six candidates formally nominated for the Comenarra Ward of the Council. As the number of candidates exceeded the number of councillors required for this ward, that number being two, a contested election was held as required by s309(1) of the Act.
6 On September 11, 1999 an election was conducted for ten councillors for Ku-ring-gai Municipal council, two for the Comenarra Ward. This being an election for two or more candidates, the method of counting votes was the optional preferential system as set out in Schedule 1 of the Regulations.
7 At the first count no candidate achieved an absolute majority of votes. Consequently a second count was conducted and preferences allocated in the manner prescribed by the Regulations, Schedule 1, clause 3. Following the…
Continue reading Insley v State Electoral Commissioner
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Insley v State Electoral Commissioner [2000] NSWADT 90
- Case
- [2000] NSWADT 90
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court examined the evidence and submissions from both parties to determine if the alleged irregularities and misconduct were significant enough to invalidate the election. It found that the third respondent had engaged in improper conduct, including providing false information to voters and using council resources for political purposes. The court held that these actions constituted significant irregularities that undermined the integrity of the electoral process. Regarding the disqualification issue, the court found that the third respondent had breached the Local Government Act 1993 (NSW) by misusing council resources, which disqualified her from holding office. Consequently, the court ordered that the third respondent be dismissed from her position as councillor.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. That the third respondent be dismissed from her office as councillor of Ku-ring-gai Municipal Council.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.