In the matter of applications by Kenneth John Bragg, John Hector Lawley, Brian Alexander Cope, and John Hector Lawley for inquiries into elections in the Australasian Society of Engineers, South Australian Branch [1984] FCA 263 | Legal Lookup
In the matter of applications by Kenneth John Bragg, John Hector Lawley, Brian Alexander Cope, and John Hector Lawley for inquiries into elections in the Australasian Society of Engineers, South Australian Branch [1984] FCA 263
Federal Court of Australia
Full text
Select any passage to save a personal note with optional tags.
CATCHWORDS Lama
Ae ta 'S
aS é .
re
Induscrial law - registered organizations - elec ton reo Ml
A LOW
applications for anquiries ~ whether requiremehy eee ls sation
iv a tr'!
mandatory - whether Court should procced with gab ner ,
possible irregularities.
Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904 s. 159(2)(c), s. 159(4) (b)
s. 163(1)(c), s. 164(4) (b)
Re Application by Ferris for an Inguiry into an Election in the
Australian _Workers' Union (1982) 2 1.R. 432
Re_ Elections for Offices in Australasian Meat Industry Employees
Union (1963) 5 F.L.R. 260
Jutte v Amalgamated Engineering Union, Australian Section (1967)
10 F.L.R. 195
Re Australian Postal and Telecommanicatiors Union: Ex parte
Wilson (1979) 28 A.L.R. 330
Re Roya] AusLlralian Nursing Federation {South Australian Branch)
(unreported 10th November 1983)
Re Penhallurick (1983) 51 A.L.R. 589
GRAY J.
MELBOURNE
21 August 1984
MRR pen etn eee SO en epermertie = ame mr ree - i a ers - --
Nene se alee rR al a a ne wee ee ae te ee
IN THe FEDERAL COURT OF AUTChARTA)
)
SOUTH AUSTRALIA DTSTRICT REGISTRY) S.A. Mo's 7, 9, 10 &
a ) ll of 1964
LNDUSPRIAL DIVISTOL )
HAkTT AR OF Ay, Vearsonu'
Mey GOIN baat, J
Hie ure J
21st August 1934
REASOMS POR diboaslid?
Before the Court are four applications for in yair3es
concerning elections in the South Avetrelran Branch of the
Australasian Sovicty of fHnaginecers. In matter S.A. No. 7 of 1%ce,
which was filed with the lndustrial Registrar on Jatn June 19a,
the Applicant 3s henneth John Bragg, and the eleclion concern ad is
that for State Socretary. In mitter E44. Now 9 OF 1384, whach vas
filed wath the Industrial Rogistrar on 6th June 98h, the
Applicant is John Hector Lawley, and tne office the subj ct of the
election is Federal Council Delesyate. Jn matcer S.A. Ne, JO ut
1984, which was also filad with the fudustrial Rogistrar cn 1871
Jure 1984, the Applicant as Brian Alexender Cope, and the ofits.
concerned is thet of Paneh Beecurdve Meme. Jr wnattes B.A. No,
1] of 1904, which wis filed wrth the Indes vctad Regeglrer on Jeth
June 1934, the Applicant 38 Wom sievlor Jewiey, and the offsee
concerned
virtue
Auslralas
N
is Organizer. AIL electaons are cowplele, and, by
of the provisions of rule 17 of the Rules of
jan Society of Enginecrs, the persons elected took o
on lst July 1984,
The
TO some extent, the applications are similar an
the
Ef1ce
form.
application an S.A. No. li of 1934 contains the following:
"PARTICULARS OP ALLACRD TPRECURAP [Pt py
The publishing and PYOVAUSIAN to the wenbershin of
the said Branch by or on behalf of the Successful
candidate Vavad Wallaan Thovoson at or prior to
the woment each ember cast his or her vole o7 a
"How 10 Vote" notice which contarsed untrue or
ancorrect statements or inferences intended or
likely to mislead or improperly interfere with the
electors of tho Said Union in or 'n relation to
the full and/or free recording and/or casting of
their votes.
The publishing and distiibuticon to each Mauwher of
the said "low 10 Vote" card at the time and in the
manner aforesaid by which Means prevenlinyg or
hindering or attempting to prevent or hinder the
full and free recording and/or casting of the
voles by the bersons entitled to record and/or
cast votes jn rejation to tre said election and/or
ballot.
The action of the Auctretian Postal Comoicsi)en
and/or its servanie« and/or agents and/or othex
wade - oe ee = eee -
3.
persons unhnowa to the Applicant whereby the "How
n
to Vote" card of the ~Applicunt Guly arranged «60 us
to be received by each and cvery merber or person
entitled to record and/or cast a vote in relation
to the said election praur to or at the time of
the casting of such vote Was ampronerly interferod
with and/or caused not to be sen thereby
preventing and/or hinde;s ing the persons entitled
to vote from fully ana [reely devennsiningy for vnon
20 east aud/or reco desl
and how such
an rejation to the said election.
The fact that a matter, miverial and significant
to the issues raised in tic suid eleclion nanely
the economic manayement of the South Australian
Branch and in particular the financial scatemenls
of the said Branch for the year ending Svuth
November, 1983 though in eristeuce and availeble
to be published and _ further shoving significant
a@cficits was restrained from publivation until
after the comnencoment of the recording and/or
casting of the votes therehy preventing and/or
hindersny the full and free recording of votes by
person, entitled to do so jn xrelatz3on to the
election.
The non-recejpt of ballet papers by persons
entitled to record a vote in the said election and
jn addition thereto:-
(a) he refuse] to provide « baellor paper to
persons entitled to vote who having nol
4.
received a ballot papcr sought a ballot paper
but were refused thereby dssenfranchising
such persons and preventing the full ani free
or any recording or casting of votes by those
persons entitled to record vores in relation
to the election.
{b) Whe provisien of billot pauners to persons
entitled to vote bal without the furriher
provision of the pre-paid, return address
envelopes where jn cuch event such p.csons
provided their own eneelope rut such vallots
were rejected thus preventeng such persons
the full and free os any recording ar the
votes in relation to the said election.
{c) The non-reccipt by persons entitled to record
votes Of any ballot paper thus prevenciny
their recording whether full and free or
otherwise of votes in relation to the said
election.
The publishing on the "How to Vote" card published
and distribated by or on behalf of David va!liam
Thompson of an authorisation by one B. Tinri which
authorisatzon by the said "Bob Tirri" did not
eccur ani would not have occurred.
The sar@ David wWalliam 'Theumson by reason of tho
registered rule of the said Union and an
particular Rules 2 and 49 is not eligible Lo etand
for the offace of Organiser for the State of Soulh
Austrelia.
—te
ut
.
PACTS RELSED OW
As to the particulars set out an paragraphs (1),
(2) and (6) the Applicant relics on the "How to
Vote" card authorised by K.&. Crowden a copy of
which 1s annexed heroto.
As to the facts relied on in paragraph (3) tho
Applicant by arrangement with the Australian
Postal Commission prior to tnd on the L6éth day of
May 1984 ensured a posting such that tne "How tv
Vote" card for the election would reéach all
persons entitled to vete no later than when tley
received the ballot paper. In accordaice with the
arrangment the Applicant deliverei envelopes
individually addressed to every person: cutitled to
cast a vote in relation to the said electien at
the Centra) Mail Exchange at 4.1]5p.m. on Fednesdey
the 16th day of May, 1984. In like manner and
with the same purpose the successful candid ce
David Willian Thompson provided to the Australten
Postal Comoissjon iniividually addressed envelopes
containing the "How to Vote" card for his
election. By actions within the Central Mai]
Exchange the Applicant's envelopes vere tterfereda
with such that they woutd arrive the day after
receipt by voters of the ballot paper and
therefore tone 24 hours efter the persons entitled
to cact therr vote woul. iy the majority of cevts
have attended to the casting of the vote.
J
Same
(a)
(b)
sane
6. .
3. As to the matters sel oul gn pareqraphs (4), (5)
and (7) this 131s based upon oral inforeatton
provided by persons entitled to cast a vole and
the Applicant proposes to call those persons to
give oral testimony to the Jrregularity
particularjsed therein.
4. Annexed hereto and marked with tne Jetter "2" asa
certified copy of the registered Rules of the
Australesian Society of Ensineers. Tne saad David
Willaaw Thompson as and vas at all waterszsal ties
a foreman employed as such by the Peoefenlre Resvarch
Centre, Salisbury ain the Stete of South
Australia."
The application jin mutter S.A. No. 7 of 1984 1s in rhe
form as that set out avnove, witn the following ecceplyons.
+
The nune "E.B. Crowden"" appears in place of the noms "David
William Thowpson" an paragraphs 1 and 6 of the Puariiculars
of Alleged Trregularities, and paragraph 2 of the Facte
Relied On;
There is no paragraph 7 of the Particulars of Allaget
d
Irregularities, and no paragraph 4 of the Waects Relred On,
Jee. there 3s no allegation of ineligibility against Nr.
Crowden, the successful candidate for the office of Staic
Secretary.
The applauation in patter S.A. No. 8 or 1494 1s in the
forn as that in matter S.A. No. 11 vf 1984 with the Fuollowins
exceptions:
(a)
(b)
(c)
same
The name "Robert F. Douglas" appeurs in place of the uaae
"Davad William 'VYhonpson" 3n paragraphs 1 and 6 of the
Particulars of Alleged Irregularities and prreygraph 2 of tne
Facts Relied On;
Paragraph 7 of the Particulars of Alleged Lrregularities,
reads as follows:
"7. The said Robert F. Douglas by reason of the
registered rules and in parraculat by reason of the
fact that he was a retired membue: us Geseribed in
Rule 40.2 was not and could not be eligible to
stand for or be a wember of the Fudercal Coni)e;i:"
Paragraph 4 of the Fucts Relied On js in the following form.
"4. Annexed hereto and marked with the letter "2" 35 a
certified copy of the stered Rules of the
ad
fe)
ise)
a
Australasian Society of Engineers. The said Robert
F. Douglas 3s and was at al] material times retired
froin the trade covered by the Constitution."
The application in mitter S.A. No. 10 of 1984 35 in the
form as that ian matter S.A. No. 11 of 198%, with the
following exceptions:
(a)
(b)
The name "Robert F. Douglas" appears ian place of the nae
"David Walliam Thompson" in paragraphs 1 and 6 of the
Particulars of Alleged Irregularities aad paragraph 2 of the
Facts Relicd On;
Paragyaph / of the Particuluzs of Allegea 'rredquleritlies
reads as follows:
- te we eR eect Male oP ans clement Bie a net a NS wee
"7. The said Robert F. Douglas by reason of the
registered rules of the said Union and in particular
Rules 2 and 40.2 is not and was not eligible to
stand for the office of the Executive for the State
of South Australia in that he had retired from the
trade covered by the Constitution of the seid Union
and was not eligible to be a member of the State
Branch Executive;"
(c) Paragraph 4 of the Facts Relied On reads as follows:
"4. Annexed hereto and timarked with the letter "2" is a
certified copy of the registered Rules of the
Australasian Society of lingineers. The said Robert
EF. Douglas is and was at all material tim2s retired
from the trade covered by the Constituticn."
Annexed to each of the applications 38S a copy of the
same document, described in argument as a "Ilow to Vote card". ft
is in the following form:
is
a
ne]
x
Nicd
|
we
mien
VY Ov |
oN
he
O
Q
\
r
Oss
vos
vos,
AUSTRALAS
wh
me
r
!
'
iy
—
[as] 5 a
a y ~~
Be At qc.
eT oo Ct
7 = =
; C ¢ 3 —
: = be S
Le woe y
nd >
oe -—
of 3 Ot c
- vd ee) Ww OW Ts L.
aa Fae a owe 2
oan ° a a S
Boe ae 2! oc aon i
~~ ov wa pay <i
_ lo i ~
we oe aol >
-™~ ~ t
on ~~ hae 2 MS
mo, : aed 7 77
ns "~ oa
contd se "
tee 7 KL, = sr
~ ~ i of
Tar boy LL Al? x
--- -~ =, ~J
re = ee -
— tos . a
ne z 4
-—y = a >.
ot. aoe — a.
i a, Na fs
Vo oC S
rs tod i
fo aN —| Ly
5 _ 7 NU weet Lt
~ 7
ae S
6 xy [ig
_— ve
< el .
Rook, to --
_ x ow
ta on
' . a
~J a
ee "a "J
~_ note 7
fen . "D >
ead *: Ls
Cf —~ Coa" — <2
ree) Ts po) --
fe OD ee) 7) tn
on oe _ = ' — 2
t2 = yas rnd veo =
Po oe rr oak =
tat yw ye we oe yoy
a | a i -sooen ey aw ot Ny se
. Ne "2 -- - Ww id Le.
", yo : —_ oc io c
re a ae soe ID !
i v "3 ~. Ge Nee NS ~
in 4 "Ss 'ee Ne ? — Sa ee _—
bes Cle — : av Sf Cc
oy a 7 t 7 cos. YS
ws Ne wae ead ns
uty t
sepapany
S.A.
aan . ot mete ee
10. :
Also annexed to the applicatiuons in matiers S.A. No. 9,
No. 10 and S.A. No. 11 of 1984, vere copies of extracts
fro.
the Rules of the Australasian Socicty of Engineers. Rule 2 of
those Rules provides as follows:
Rule
"RULMN 2. CONS S ULES LON
This Gociety shall consist of members eudaged Jn any of
the following trades or 'ranches of tradas:
(a) Engineers, Filters, Turners, Water Meter Fatters,
ool and Gauye Makers, Die Sinkorcs, Mechenical and/ov
Sorentific Instrument Makers, Scale Makers and
Adjvsters, Sale Mahers, Pape witterc, Motor Hecheanies,
and iwisrs ana Testers, Cycl2 and Motar Cycle iecbanics,
Typoviriter hechani¢s, Vattersmibvers, Coppersas this,
Brassfinisners, (Enginecring and General) Vorgers, sorye
Furnacemen, ener Sarpemsshs, ANGLe lron3iait tio,
Sprinusr2tis "Ing PFittes Welders, Oxy-Aceryloene
Cutters, 'Lo oc cami ths, Mechan} cal Draughe sven,
Mi] Ve *ghte, Jrou and Sleel Rollers, Liectrical Witte. s,
Electrical Mechanics, Machsae Marner, Mal Ligy
Machrnisis, Planers, Slotters, Borers, Shapers,
raLllers, Polishers, Grinder Jad hapnoers, Bolt eid mut
Machinists, Aygricultwal Lipp Louw ise fiasers, Pane) Reatocs
{restricted to Panel Beaters onmployed in "the Aust calrvan
Capital Territory by the Deoarteenl of the Interjor in
the Yransport Werxshop), Gunsmiths, Technicians (ecept
persons who are members or eliqivle for menbsrship of
the Association of Architects, Bngineers, Serveyors and
Draughismen of Australia) and any other Machine
Opesators or MNechanacs crployed in the engineering,
Loconotive, Shipbuildind. Rolling Stock, Airerafl
Munition and Jron Trades, or in any other Industry, and
the paid offictals of the Socicry.
(b) Smiths! strikers and mechanics! assistants or
groups of strikers and assistatts engiged 3n any of the
above trades dee1rding to amajgemate with or join this
Seciety shall be admitted upon such terms as shall be
agreed upon by the Federal Coune1il and coans'stent with
the Rules of the Society, so Jon, as it is not
antagonistic tom any other Trade Unaic.. Gealang solely
with that cluss of worker and operating . the jimnediate
locality."
49 coitains the follavund provisions:
"RULE 40. MIEMSEURSHTP SBucTloss
1}. -
1. Honorary Nembcis:
Any member upon being apprzinted to the position of
foreman or sub-foreman, or leaviuy the trade, may, 3J£ ne
desires to retain his wemhersbip, become an nonorury
Memper.
Any inember appointed to the staff shall not be cligible
for honerary wewhership af he uses the tvoels cf trade
Bn honorary wewrber way take part in any meeting of his
Branch and speak on any subject dealt with at the
eetsany, but he shall not move or second a notion or he
eliginple to hold any offices aug shall havo no vole at
meetungs except on matters aficceting tae Funerul Fund.
An honorary rember shall not be wade an active nember
whilst unemmloyed o: avay from tne trade, wd snall not
contest an election far an BNecuiive posttion until he
has been an active momour for six insuithe. amy mene of
the Society occupying the position of forenmsin or
sub-foreman shnalh be exceume Lrer takiny part an any
trades dispates and shall not. vork with the tools of
trade.
2. Retired Members:
No member who has retired from the trades covered by the
constitution of this Society shell retatn Ffuyl
mewbecohip of the Suciaty, proviaad that my inember tho
hes 1¢cn consecutive years as a financial iu Sober cud who
has reached the age of 55 years ani who his revived from
work because of age or illness or apeapucrty hey oe
a retired momoer of the Society and may retain his
Funeral Benefits by the payment of twenty cents (2uc.)
per quarter. A reticed member snajl] not be eligible to
be a inember of the Federa) Councj] or any Stave Franch
Executive or any Sub-Branch HNxecutive."
cyt a
cui 2
Cn 5th July 1984, at Adelaide, Mr. McCusker appeaced
before me for the Applicant an each case. Mr. Kensse appeared for
the Australasian Society of Engineers in each case, and also Cur
Mr. Crowden ijn ratter S.A. No. 7 of 1984, Mr. Douglas gn matters
S.A. No. 9 and S.A. No. 10 of 1984, and Mr. Thosnsoan gn matier
S.A. No. 11] of 1984. In each case, Mr. Matterne appeared Lor
Graham John Carey, the Returning Officer. Mr. KFenzie sought to
prevent cach of the inquiries froaw proceeding furtnec. He relied
upon the provisioas of ss. U89(4)(e}, and 159(4)(»), of Lhe
Concidiat jon and Arbitration Act 1904. These provisiors are in
E
12. .
the following terms:
"(2)) An application unde) this section shall-
(c) specify the election in respect of which the
application is mije and the irregularity Which is
claimed to have occurred, and state tne facts
relied on an support of the appliculion;
pony
w
(4) An application miy be mad? uader this seztion in
respect of an elecvicn reversed to ia sub-section
(3) 2£ the applivation 1g mice wilhin the tam: tnat
3S applaucable under the neste succeeding sub-section
and, where such an "apps cacion 3s made:
(b) the Court 35 nok required t9 procecd with an
inquiry unless at ts satisfred that there as
reasonable ground fur the ¢pylication;"
Mr. Kenzie drew attention to a passace Crom the yodgrert
of Fitzgerald J. jn Re Apnlicataonu hy Ferris Foc 3zn Jsqasrys te
an Election 3n the Australian Workers! Unton (1962) 2 1.R. 432 at
page 447, which reads as follovs:
"A number of autherilies indicate tnat the
requirements of sub-s. 159(2) are mandatory and that a
farlnre to comply with them savstantiajly avoids Ine
application. The first of these cases seemd to be R. v.
ones liation ans
Cormonvealth Court of
parce Federal. x Clerks Union Of Aust
C550) BE SLURRY 224; see bp. 247 pes Lathan Cad. with
whom licTieruan and Kitio Jd. aygrecd ant webnp J. at op.
224. That decisio)1 his since been applied on two
occasions by single jJudyes of this Court: see Re
on in Aad @ ani Clerical Officers
ion, ¢ sl7c bervice (1480) Current
Review [137] p. 303, &@ decession os Sheppard J., and the
decisjzon of Evatt 97. gn Re en Anrlica
in ANTE
pitxvat ior ex parts or ait
The particular requirement of sub-s. 159(2) upon
which the resnmoneents placed relianee tr inat contained
13. .
jn par. (c), that the applacution shall "specify...the
irregularity which is C1 alned to have oeccucred, and
state the facts relied on dn support of the
applicition". Insofar as the application fails
sufficiently to sect out the facts relied on, counse) for
the union further submitted that the applicant has
failed to comply with par. (ad) of sup-s. 3159(7), an thet
there 1s no statement of Facts un the application toa
which the statuiory declarulion cun be rcuvarded as
referring. It as unnec osoary for the purpese of this
mitter to say more than that this sees to we a
submission of considerable foree: see Kh. v.
Coneonvealth Courc of Couciliatien ald Arbitration; cx
parte ¥ ' aio op. P41; cf. In
re Beriid) (1976) AvlLed.R. 359; and Evans v.
Crilenos- Breen, supra.
'4
Having regard to that pussage, ani to tne authorittcsa cited in J
J am preprired to accept that the recujrauneits of sub-s.(2)(c) aie
mandatory. Iv. Kenzte anvited me to hold that esch of tnu
Applicants hal failet to state the facts relicd on by nim su
Support of his application; juoofar as facts vere stated, mr.
Kenzic argued, they were insufficient to make out a ecse that an
yyregularity or j3rregulailties may have occurred in relatron io
any of the subject clections. Tn the alternative, lir. Keunzie
argued that the grounds set forth ian the applications did not
disclose matters which gave rise to a reasonable ground for any of
the applications to preceed, and that 1 should teriwiuate euch of
the inquiries pursuant to sub-s. (4)(b). Mr. Kenzie did not
invite me to reach a determination on the question whether any
particular matter js capable of constitutiny an irregularity, in
Situations where the authorities are in confliet or there 13
controversy as to what may akount to an irxecgularity. An example
of such a watter vhere controversy exists 16 the question whetner
an act or mission by a person entirely unconnected with tne
Ovygani4atiou could constitute an arregeiarity. Lt js proper that.
at this stave, I shontd take the viww most favourable to tLe
oe ee ee mee eee .
14. ".
Applicants as to what might constitute an irregalarity, rather
than trying to determine controversial issues without the benefit
of full argument or evidence.
It was conceded by Mr. Kenzie that, if tne facts alleg.d
3n any of the applications were sufficient to satisfy sub-:.(2)(c)
in relation to any one ground upon which that application was
based, the inquiry was properly before tne Court. In iy view,
this as a proper concession. There 16 authority that an inquiry
pursuant to Part IX of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act 19C14
1s not Jamrited by the grounds expressed in the applaicatiou; the
obligation of the Court pursuant to 5. 165 as to "inquire irto and
determine the question whether any irregularity has occurred".
«
See Re Electio
FaLasi on Meat Tnda
Employees Uagon (1963) 5 F.L.R. 260 at paye 265, dJutte v
Amalgamated Engineering Union, Australyan Section (1967) LO i.Leh,
195 at pages 201-2, and ke Australian Postal ana
Telecomnunications Union; ex parte Wilson (1979) 28 A.L.R. 3350 at
page 333. Once an inguiry is properly before the court, the court
has power, pursuant to s. 164{4)(b), to inform itse)1 on any
matter in such manner as it thinks just. An anguiry into an
election 3s not an ordinary proceeding jn which the court jis
content to listen only to the allegations of the parties and to
rely upon them to provide the avidence. Although adversarial in
nature, the procedure has inquisitorial aspects.
It was common ground between the parties that, for the
£
purposes of s. 159(2)(c), it is perrisutrle for the conrt to loo.
at any part of the @ocument constituting a purported application.
4 ewe 8 ee Re ~—
In order to determine what facts are stated as relicd on gn
support of the application, the court js not confaned ta wher
appears under the heading "Facts Relied On".
In each of the applicaLlions in walters S.A. Ho. 9, S.A.
No. 10 and S.A. No. J] of 1984, there 2s an alleyition thet the
successful candidate ian the election concerned was aneligitbie to
be a candidate. See paragraph 7 of the Purtsiculaurs of A) Leyod
Irregularities and parayraph 4 of th2 Tacts Relied On, rogeriicr
with the annexed extracts from the Rul¢s an eich of r.hose waiters,
With respect to Mr. Douglas, in maiters S.A. Ho. 9 and S.A. No.
10, the allegation is made that he is "retired from tne trade
covered by the Constitution". In matter S.A. Mo. TL of 1984, ne
atleyation 398 made with respect to Hr. Thormeon that he "is and
was at all material times a foreman employed as sven py ihe
Defence Research Centre, Saltsbury". These allecdationus are
alleyations of fact. True at ais, they are not detailed, but wu a
real sense they do constitute the facts relied on.
The acceptance by a returning officer of the nosinalson
of an ineligible candidate is capable of constituting an
irregularity. See, for exairple, the decision of Pisher J. in Re
Royal Australian Nursing Federation (south Australian Branch)
(unreported, 1LOLh November 1983). lt follows that cach of matiorrs
S.A. No. 9, S.A. No. 310 and S.A. No. 11 of 1934 3s properly
instituted with respect to at least the ground of ineligibility,
and that s. 159(?)(c) has been complied with wath respect to that
ground.
. i eS eee ere . s - -
16.
The same does not apply to matter S.A. No. 7 of 1984,
which contains no aJjJlegation of iucligibility. {n thet
application, as in the others, the allegations in parayraphs 1, ?
and 6 of the Particulars of Alleyed Irregularities are cast ta
wide terms. Paragraphs 1 and G do, however, state facts. inoa
sense, the annexure of the How to Vote card itself is a statement
of a fact or facts relied on. 'hat How 19 Vote curd 3s allegzd to
contain untrue and ineorrect statements or inferences. Mr.
McCusker suggested that the failure of tne How to Vote card io
distingursh menbors of the Ernie Crowlen tean From those who ve.
not members of that team was wisleadiny. ln particular, itr.
McCusker suygested that some persons might be induuccad to belrev:
that ty. Bragg was a mumbper of tir. Crowden's Lean by lhe fret
his name appears on the How to Vote card in type of the same sine
and enphasds as all the other names. lt 3s clear that the
resolution of these allegatious depends to a large extent on tue
inferences to be drawn from the How to Vote card wlself and on
argument. It may also depend upon the existence or non-existc ce
ef evidence of actual inislcading. Even af thas is so, it is cle:
that s. 159(2)(c) docs not require that the application contain
a
the whole of the evidence; all that as required is that the facis
relied on be stated. ln my view, sufficient facts are stated wn
each of the applicotions with respect to the Particulars of
Alleged Trregularities in paragraprs 1, 2 and 6G. There 19
authority that the masleading of voters might constitute an
irregularity. See Re Penhaliurich (1983) 51 A.L.R. 589, at page
596 where, Pituygerald J. said:
"Thus, any breach of tne rules will pe an iurreguiarily,
as will be anv act, omission or other step which
revents or hinders Une full and fiec retoreding Of votus
J
he - wet ee ee et a . ors
17.
by a)l persons entiatied to record votes or the correct
ascertainment or declaration of the ierults of the
voting. But conduct which may not meet elther
deseription may also be an irregularity. For eyznole,
it seems to mo that it may wel] ve that conduct vinch
misleads voters and thereby causes Lhem to alter the.r
votes, but not to refrain fror voting may not properly
he described as conduct which prevents or hinders the
full and free recording of votes; ck Hvyans v
Creichton-Srovmne (1981) 33 A.L.R. GO9; 59 ALL... 27
at 288. However, it dues not seen to me to be opun to
doubt that such conduct veidht well conetitute an
gyreygularity and micht well gustify the court declartay
an election void af, having reg-var3i to the relihasi? of
other simzlar grregularities, the irregularity in
question may have affected the rveeult of the olcetion."
On this reasoning, each of the apylications complies wvitn
s. 159(2)(c) with respect to paragrupns 3, 2 aur G of the
—
Particulars of Alleyed Irregularities. In addtiion, at cannot Fe
said that there is no reasonable ground for the application wien
raspect to those allegations. lt mast be empluistzed that, in
reaching these conclusions, 1 am not to be taken as having mad? a
final @etermination of the issue whether any zrreygilartty haz
occurred jin relation to any of the subject elections. The
determination of those issues will depend upon the hearang of
evidence and the completzon of full argunent. Still less am} to
be taken us having reached any conclusion at all on whe issus
whether, if any irregularity has ocevrred, it may have affeccred
the resuit of any election. That question simply has not arisen
yet.
Once an inquiry of this kind is proparly before the
court in relation to one or more grounds, there is a real doubt
whetber the court can exercise the power under s. 159(4)(i2) an
relation to other specific allegations of Iriegeulariries. Tn
other words, there is a real doubt whether the court can refuse tu
a ae en ee ee Rene eee -- - . - "~
18.
procecd in relation 10 some of the alleged irregularities.
Section 159(4)(b) refers to "an iuanquiry" and not to any specific
jrregularity. In my view, the court could only refuse to procead
if there was no reasonable ground for the application at all. Te
follows, therefore, that these ingquirics must proceed, as
reasonable grounds for the applications to exist.
In these circunstances, 3 1% preferable that L mate no
comment on the Particulars of Alleged Irregularities with which 1
have not already dealt. Mr. mMceCus\er submtted a docuaent, with
annexures, Which contrined Further particulars un rejJation 10 eacn
of the alleged arreygularities. The tiocument also cought to addi oc
furthor alleged irregulerity. Havany regaid to the fact that ti.
gnquiry will proceed in respect of each application, it as
appropriate that 1 should say nothing imora about these alleyatiuus
a
until such tine as evidenss is before the Court and full argur eur
has been heard.
Mr. McCusker sought orders pursuant to s. 163{1)(c) of
the Act. In the first place, he iunviteda the Court to order that
all of the persons who held office bofore lst duly 1984 shouli
continue to act in their offices unta] the completion of the
inquiry in each case. in this respect, Mr. McCusker emphasizcd
the width of s. 163(1)(c), and argued that that provision yives to
the Covrt a discretion to rake orders of the kind sought. Tnere
is nce doubt that the provision is broad enouyh to permit the Court
to make creers of the kinds sougut. The questton Js whether thnocs
orders are proper in alk the cire wtances. it was drawn te uc.
McCuster's attention that to make the orders he sought vould neve
19. .
the effect of reinstating in office persons who had not souyut
re-clecti1on and who had, thereforc, mudicated that they no Longe.
wished to act in their former offices. Those persons vere not
before the Court. In iy view, ther2 jis a very real diffurence
between making an order under 6s. 16o3(1l)le) at the rznstance of a
person who seek. to be reinstatcd to an of fies, and making such an
order cu.wpelling unwilling persons Who are not pefote the Court to
act jn capacities which they have riuonunced.
Mr. McCusker then reslrictcel his application to an order
that the Applicant in intier S.A. Mo. 7 of 1984, Kouneth Johan
Bragg, act as Organizer pending the outcone of the inauiry inle
that, position. Nr. Braqy held the o fice of Organizer up to the
30th of June 19284. Ho vas not, hovyever, a candidate for thet
office in the subject election; he preferred to renounvte his
position as Organizer, and to sland for election as Branen
Secretary. In those circumstances, it is extremely difficult ic
see how the Court could, in effect, reinstate Mr. Bragq a5
Organizer. When seeking to be elected to another office, he unis
be taken to have accented the rask that, of he faajJed an has hid
for that office, he would not be able to fall back on his previous
position as Oryanlzer. Mr. MeCusler pressed upon mes tnat this
risk wae undertaken by lit. Bragy vpon the footing that he would
perticipate jl a properly condactcd elaction. This is undou»tcely
so, but lL do not think that it alters the nature of the choise
made by Mr. Bragg. Reference was also made to the facet chat cir.
Bragg is now naempaloyet, whereas Nr. Tha pson, Lhe succes.tr]
candidate im the election for Orgaaicer, hay be able to resur* tho
employment which he had up to 30th June 1904, Tr appoars 10 un2
20. ~
that these considerations are too problemtical. On the evidence
before me, persons have becn elected to cfiice by fairly
substantial aajyorities Ian each case. Notwithstanding the
possilmlity that irregularities may have occurred, those porsons
are the choice of those vembers of the Branch who voted to occupy
their respective positions. I do not think that the intentions of
the voters wno so expressed their djintentrons should be overruled
on an interim basis. I therefore propoce io dismiss the
application for jnterim ordecss.
Mr. McCusxer also sought access to material ino rhe
possession o£ the Returning Officer. Whe Returning officer is ner
unwillrig to provide information. Vt oapyenrs to mo thar ?
iHeCusker!r request in thas reqard, will be met adeujuately by ws0
order waich T propose to make, that the Returniny Officer file ana
serve an affidavit concerning his conduct of the clectisn.
The inguirjes will contunuae; I propose to hear th-
partics on the question what directions are appropriate, including
a direction as to the time within which the Returning Officer is
to fale his affidavit. Other than an order dismissing the
application for interim orders, it is unnecessary for me to make
any order as to the occupancy of the various positions, pending
the outcoue of tie inquiries. By the force of the rutes, thore
electc? will hold office un}ess and until any order is made to the
contrary. | .
vw