Thompson v Randwick Municipal Council

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.