Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Ch5 Members / QUALIFICATIONS AND DISQUALIFICATIONS / Challenges to membership / Section 44(iv) of the Constitution



Download WordDownload Word

House of Representatives                                Ch 5                                                 p 136

 

Members / QUALIFICATIONS AND DISQUALIFICATIONS / Challenges to membership

 

Section 44(iv) of the Constitution

On 3 September 1975 the Queensland Parliament chose Mr Albert Field to fill a casual vacancy caused by the death of Senator Milliner. On 9 September a motion was moved in the Senate to have his eligibility referred to the Standing Committee of Disputed Returns and Qualifications on the ground that he was not eligible to be chosen as a Senator on 3 September because he had not legally resigned from an office of profit under the Crown. 1 The motion was defeated and Senator Field was sworn in. 2 A writ was served on Senator Field on 1 October 1975 challenging his eligibility to sit in the Senate. 3 The Senate then granted him leave of absence for one month. 4 The Senate was dissolved on 11 November and the matter did not come to court.

On 11 April 1992 Mr Philip Cleary was elected at a by-election for the division of Wills. Mr Cleary, a teacher, had been on leave without pay at the time of nomination and polling, but had resigned from his teaching position before the declaration of the poll. A petition to the Court of Disputed Returns disputed the election on the ground that Mr Cleary had held an office of profit under the Crown by reason, inter alia, of his being an officer of the Education Department of Victoria. The Court ruled on 25 November 1992 that Mr Cleary had not been duly elected and that his election was absolutely void. In its reasons for judgment the Court found unanimously that, as a permanent officer in the teaching service, Mr Cleary had held an office of profit under the Crown, that it was irrelevant that he was on leave without pay, and that the section applied to State as well as Commonwealth officers. The majority judgment of the Court was that the word ‘chosen’ in section 44(iv) related to the whole process of being elected, which commenced from and included the day of nomination, and that Mr Cleary was therefore ‘incapable of being chosen’. 5 Mr Cleary was subsequently elected as the Member for Wills at the March 1993 general election.

On 2 March 1996 Miss J. Kelly was elected for the division of Lindsay. At the time of her nomination Miss Kelly had been an officer of the Royal Australian Air Force, although she had, at her request, been transferred to the RAAF Reserve before the date of the poll. A petition to the Court of Disputed Returns challenged the election on the basis of section 44(iv). Before the decision of the Court it became common ground between the parties that Miss Kelly had been incapable of being chosen as a Member of the House of Representatives while serving as an officer of the RAAF at the time of her nomination as a candidate. The Court ruled on 11 September 1996 that Miss Kelly had not been duly elected and that her election was absolutely void. 6 A new election was held for the division of Lindsay and Miss Kelly was elected.

Also in 1996 was the case of Ms J. Ferris, who was elected as a Senator for South Australia. However, between the date of nomination and the declaration of the result Ms Ferris had been employed by a Parliamentary Secretary and, anticipating a challenge under section 44(iv), she resigned before taking her seat. The South Australian Parliament subsequently appointed her to the casual vacancy thus created. 7

The view has been expressed that a person who accepts an office of profit under the Crown is disqualified from membership of the Parliament from the date of appointment to and acceptance of the office rather than from the time he or she commences his or he r duties or receives a salary. 8

The provisions of section 44(iv) concerning ‘any pension payable during the pleasure of the Crown out of any of the revenues of the Commonwealth’ have not been subject to judicial determination. It may be considered that a pension payable under the provisions of an Act of the Commonwealth Parliament would not be caught by the term ‘payable during the pleasure of the Crown’. 9



J 1974-75/905-6; S. Deb. (9.9.75) 603.



J 1974-75/905-6.



Odgers , 6th edn, pp. 152-3.



J 1974-75/928.



Sykes v. Cleary (1992) 109 ALR 577. VP 1990-92/1907.



Free v. Kelly & Anor , Judgment 11 September 1996, (No. S94 of 1996). Miss Kelly was also ordered to pay two thirds of the petitioner’s costs. A further basis of challenge under s. 44(i), a claim that at the time of nomination Miss Kelly held dual Australian and New Zealand citizenship, was not pursued at the trial of the petition.



 For further details and discussion see Odgers , 11th edn, p. 128.



Opinion of Solicitor-General relating to appointment of Senator Gair as Ambassador to Ireland, dated 4 April 1974; and see Odgers , 6th edn, pp. 56-7.



And see advice by Australian Government Solicitor, dated 4 March 2005.