Thompson v Randwick Municipal Council - [1953] HCA 75

THE COUNCIL OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF

RANDWICK

RESPONDENT. DEFENDANT,

ON APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT

OF NEW SOUTH WALES. Local Government (N.S.W.)-Municipality-Division into wards-Aldermen-

Alteration in boundaries of wards and number of aldermen--Request for poll- Non-compliance with request-Proclamation-Validity-Injunction-Right of individual elector-Voting rights-Impairment-Local Government Act 1919- 1952 (N.S.W.) (No. 41 of 1919-No. 53 of 1952), SS. 58*, 648*.

The Minister for Local Government issued a notice announcing that a proposal had been received that the division of the Municipality of Randwick into wards should be altered, SO that the boundaries of the wards should be * Section 58 of the Local Government

the Governor shall, on the request of Act 1919-1952 provides :-

one hundred or more of the electors of

90 CLR 450

as described in the schedule thereto. More than one hundred electors, of whom the plaintiff was one, requested the Governor to remit to a poll of the electors of the municipality the question whether the alterations should be carried out. No poll was held. A proclamation by the Governor subsequently purported to alter the division into wards of the municipality, and to alter the number of aldermen constituting the council. The plaintiff sought to restrain the council from compiling lists of electors and holding elections

Held, that the plaintiff had no locus standi to ask for such relief, no right of the plaintiff being impaired.

Held, further, that, by virtue of the provisions of S. 648 of the Local Govern- ment Act 1919-1952 (N.S.W.), the proclamation was valid, notwithstanding that the provisions of S. 58 (4) had not been complied with.

Decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Myers A.J.) (1953) 19 L.G.R. 121, affirmed.

APPEAL from the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

Dr. G. S. Thompson, an elector of the Municipality of Rand- wick, brought a suit by way of statement of claim in the equitable jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of New South Wales claiming certain injunctions and other relief against the Council of the Municipality of Randwick. The statement of claim was substan- tially as follows :-

1. The plaintiff is and has at all material times been an elector of the Municipality of Randwick.

2. In New South Wales Government Gazette No. 75 of 17th April 1953 there appeared a notice which omitting the schedule therein reads as follows :-

"Local Government Act 1919 Municipality of Randwick-Proposed Alteration of Division

A proposal has been received that the division of the Municipality of Randwick into wards be altered SO that the boundaries of the said wards shall be as described in the schedule hereto. A period of one month from the date of this notice is allowed during which the Council or any elector of the Municipality may make written representations to the Minister with regard to the proposal or one hundred or more electors of the Municipality may petition the Governor to remit the question to a poll of electors of the whole Municipality

J.…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Thompson v Randwick Municipal Council and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [1953] HCA 75
Decision Date: 18 November 1953

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant, an elector of the Municipality of Randwick, sought to restrain the respondent council from compiling new lists of electors and holding elections based on a proclamation that purported to alter the municipality's ward boundaries and increase the number of aldermen. The appellant contended that the proclamation was invalid because a request for a poll of electors, made by over one hundred residents including himself, had not been complied with, contrary to section 58(4) of the *Local Government Act 1919-1952* (NSW). The Supreme Court of New South Wales upheld a demurrer to the statement of claim, and the appellant appealed to the High Court.

The High Court was required to determine two primary legal issues: firstly, whether the appellant possessed the necessary *locus standi* to bring the suit, meaning whether a private right of his had been infringed by the council's actions; and secondly, whether the Governor's proclamation altering the ward boundaries was valid despite the alleged non-compliance with the requirement to hold a poll of electors. The appellant argued that his right to be enrolled and to vote in a lawfully constituted ward was a private right that had been impaired by the purported invalid proclamation.

The Court reasoned that the appellant lacked the requisite *locus standi* because the facts, as pleaded and clarified by reference to the Government Gazette, did not establish that his right to be enrolled or to vote in a specific ward had been impaired. While the municipality was redivided into five wards from four, the ward in which the appellant resided was substantially unchanged, and the alleged impairment stemmed from indirect consequences such as altered proportions of aldermen and voters, rather than a direct infringement of his enrolment or voting rights in a lawfully constituted ward. Furthermore, even if *locus standi* were established, the Court found that the proclamation was valid by virtue of section 648 of the *Local Government Act 1919-1952*. This section provides that a proclamation made by the Governor under the Act shall not be deemed invalid by reason of any non-compliance with any preliminary requirement. The Court held that the failure to hold a poll, even if a request had been properly made, constituted a non-compliance with a preliminary matter and did not invalidate the proclamation itself.

Consequently, the appeal was dismissed with costs.

Orders