Mitchell v Bailey (No 3) [2008] FCA 1029

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Mitchell v Bailey (No 3) [2008] FCA 1029

PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS – Court of Disputed Returns – appropriate orders – where parties agreed the Commonwealth should pay the costs of the petitioner and of the first respondent – where the Commonwealth was not a party to the petition – where the Commonwealth did not object to the orders sought – where the proceeding raised novel issues that were in the public interest to resolve – where the Court corrected errors made during the scrutiny of the reserved ballot-papers

Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 (Cth) ss 360(1)(ix), 360(4) and 369 Mitchell v Bailey (No 2) [2008] FCA 692 cited Nile v Wood (1988) 167 CLR 133 followed Hudson v Lee (1993) 177 CLR 627 cited ROB MITCHELL v FRAN BAILEY and THE AUSTRALIAN ELECTORAL COMMISSION

VID 123 of 2008

TRACEY J

11 JULY 2008

MELBOURNE

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY VID 123 of 2008

BETWEEN: ROB MITCHELL

Petitioner

AND: FRAN BAILEY

First Respondent

THE AUSTRALIAN ELECTORAL COMMISSION

Second Respondent

JUDGE: TRACEY J DATE OF ORDER: 11 JULY 2008

WHERE MADE: MELBOURNE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The petition be dismissed. 2. The Commonwealth pay the petitioner his costs of and incidental to the petition, including costs reserved by Crennan J on 21 February 2008 and any other reserved costs, on a party/party basis. 3. The Commonwealth pay the first respondent her costs of and incidental to the petition, including costs reserved by Crennan J on 21 February 2008 and any other reserved costs, on a party/party basis. AND THE COURT DIRECTS THAT: 4. The Registrar forthwith give to the Clerk of the House of Representatives and to the Governor-General a copy of the foregoing orders. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.