McGinty, Gallop and Halden v State of Western Australia

The parties in this matter were the plaintiffs, McGinty, Gallop and Halden, and the defendant, the State of Western Australia. The proceedings before the High Court of Australia concerned a dispute regarding the Electoral Distribution Act. The immediate issue before the Court was a procedural one, specifically whether to amend a case stated to include an additional question concerning the severability of certain sections of the Act. This amendment was sought by the defendant, who believed that if the challenged sections were found invalid, the remainder of the Act might not survive.

The legal issues before the Court were primarily procedural, focusing on the amendment of the case stated and the consequent extension of time for parties to file submissions. The defendant sought to add a question about the severability of specific sections of the Electoral Distribution Act from the Act itself. The plaintiffs initially raised concerns about potential ambiguity in this question, fearing it might extend to the validity of the Electoral Reform Act 1987. The Court also had to consider the appropriate timelines for the filing of written submissions by the plaintiffs, the defendant, and the intervener, the Attorney-General for the Commonwealth, given the proposed amendment to the case stated and the approaching hearing date.

The Court's reasoning centred on facilitating a comprehensive and timely resolution of the substantive legal issues. It accepted the parties' agreement that the severability question was intended to refer only to the severability of sections from the Electoral Distribution Act. The Court then addressed the proposed extensions of time for submissions, balancing the parties' need for adequate preparation time with the proximity of the hearing date. The Court ultimately made orders in terms of a memorandum of consent, amending the case stated to include the severability question and setting new, fixed dates for the filing of submissions by all parties, including a provision for a reply by the plaintiffs.