Taylor v Key - [2015] NZHC 722

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CIV 2014-404-2657 [2015] NZHC 722

UNDER the Electoral Act 1993

IN THE MATTER OF

an Election Petition relating to the
Helensville Electoral District

BETWEEN

ARTHUR WILLIAM TAYLOR Petitioner

AND

JOHN PHILLIP KEY First Respondent

ELECTORAL COMMISSION Second Respondent

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS Third Respondent

ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF NEW ZEALAND

Fourth Respondent

Hearing: 27, 28 and 29 January 2015

Court:

Winkelmann, Heath and Venning JJ

Counsel:

A W Taylor, in person, Petitioner
P T Kiely and M King for First Respondent
V L Hardy and D J Perkins for Second, Third and Fourth
Respondents
A S Butler and E J Watt, amicus curiae

Judgment:

16 April 2015

JUDGMENT (NO. 3) OF THE COURT

This judgment was delivered by me on 16 April 2015 at 4.00 pm pursuant to
Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules.
Registrar/ Deputy Registrar

TAYLOR v KEY & ORS [2015] NZHC 722 [16 April 2015]

Contents

Introduction [1]

The statutory framework for an election petition [11]

Standing generally [13]

Is Mr Taylor qualified to vote under s 60? [30]

Does Mr Taylor qualify to be registered in the Helensville electorate

under s 74?

[35]

Is Mr Taylor disqualified from registering as a serving prisoner? [56]

(a)      General background [59]

(b)      Does the present s 80(1)(d) apply to Mr Taylor? [63]

(c)       Does the original s 80(1)(d) apply to Mr Taylor? [66]

(d)      The punitive/rehabilitative issue [70]

(e)       The transitional issue [79]

What follows from lack of standing? [83]

Conclusion [93]

Costs [94]

Introduction

[1] Mr Arthur Taylor is the petitioner in this election petition. He is an inmate at Auckland (Paremoremo) Prison, currently serving a sentence of 17 years, six months’ imprisonment. Paremoremo prison is located within the Helensville electorate. Mr Taylor challenges the lawfulness of the election for the Helensville electorate, which occurred as part of a General Election held on Saturday, 20
September 2014. The Rt Hon John Key is the Member of Parliament for Helensville, the Prime Minister of New Zealand, and the leader of the New Zealand National Party.

[2] Mr Taylor’s challenge to the lawfulness of the election is brought on several

grounds:

(a) Prisoners were wrongly excluded from voting at the General Election.

Mr Taylor says that the Electoral (Disqualification of Sentenced Prisoners) Amendment Act 2010 (the Disqualification Act) is invalid because it purported to amend voter eligibility provisions in s 74 of the Electoral Act 1993 (the Act), but was passed in the House of Representatives by a simple majority. Mr Taylor says that the provisions Parliament amended were entrenched and therefore required a 75 per cent majority to be passed into law. Other reasons

are also advanced as to why the Disqualification Act is ineffective as a matter of law. In advancing this argument Mr Taylor acknowledges that prior to the amendments effected by the Disqualification Act, on its face s 80(1)(d) of the Act (the original s 80(1)(d)) already applied to disqualify him from voting. Since 1993…

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.

Continue reading Taylor v Key

Details

AGLC: Taylor v Key [2015] NZHC 722
Case: [2015] NZHC 722
Decision Date: 16 April 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Taylor v Key the Court was required to determine whether the petitioner, Arthur William Taylor, had standing to bring an election petition challenging the election of the Hon John Key as the Member of Parliament for Helensville. Mr Taylor, a serving prisoner, argued that he had a right to vote in the Helensville election and that the election was unlawful on several grounds. The Court held that Mr Taylor lacked standing because he had no right to vote at the election, and therefore did not have the necessary standing to bring the petition. The Court found that Mr Taylor was not registered to vote in Helensville, was not entitled to register as an elector in Helensville, and was disqualified from registering as a prisoner under both the original and amended versions of s 80(1)(d) of the Electoral Act 1993. As a result of the finding of lack of standing, the Court declined to consider the merits of the petition, issue a certificate as to the result of the election, or a report under s 245 of the Electoral Act. The Court reserved the question of costs.

Orders