Australian Republic Constitution
Australian Flag News Get Involved! Events Resources
Main Menu
ACM Home
About ACM
ACM News
Anthems
Afghan Court Martial
Book Reviews
The Commonwealth
Contact ACM
Convenor's Column
Constitutional Monarchies and Republics Compared
Constitutional Monarchy in the Muslim World
Cost of Republicanism to the Taxpayer
Crowned Republic
Diamond Jubilee 2012
Event News
Federalism and the Mining Tax
Fiji
Flag: Keep The Flag
Governor of New South Wales
Head of State
Keating-Turnbull Republic: The Nineties
Knights & Dames
Latest News and Opinions
Links
Mate for a Head of State
Media and monarchy
Nile Inquiry
Opinion Polling
Orthodoxy and Monarchy
People's Republic?
Plebiscites
Prince Andrew
Prince Charles
Prince Harry
Prince Philip
Prince William & Catherine
Prince William In Australia
Prince William: The Early Years
Racist Republic?
Reserve Powers of the Crown
Resources
Return the Governor
Royal Commissions
Royal Finances
Self Funded Monarchy
Royal Yacht Britannia
The Succession
2020 Summit
Join our Mailing List
See our selection of videos from across the world:-
ACM Videos
AussieCrownTV - ACM's own TV channel:
Aussie Crown TV
Follow ACM on Facebook:
Facebook
Self Funded Monarchy
Self Funded Monarchy
Royal Finances
Royal Finances
Diamond Jubilee 2012
Diamond Jubilee 2012
Head of State
Prince Philip
Prince Philip
Special Caribbean Report: Crown & Commonwealth

      Crown

The Commonwealth
The Commonwealth
Prince Harry
Prince Harry
Prince Andrew
Prince Andrew
Knights & Dames
Knights & Dames
The King's Speech: read the book, see the film.

The King's Speech

Watch the 2010 Neville Bonner Oration: Tony Abbott.
Tony Abbott
Nile Inquiry
Royal Commissions
Royal Commissions
Opinion Polls

 

Plebiscites
Plebiscites
2020 Summit
2020 Summit
Orthodoxy & Monarchy
Orthodoxy & Monarchy
Afghan Court Martial
Constitutional Monarchy in the Muslim World
Constitutional Monarchy in the Muslim World
Mate for a Head of State
Mate for a Head of State
Racist Republic?
Racist Republic
A People's Republic?
A People's republic?
Keating Turnbull Republic: The Nineties
The Keating Turnbull Republic
Crowned Republic
Crowned Republic
Polls
Republicans' Best Asset?
Is David Flint ( National Convenor since 1998) the republicans best asset, as some claim?
ACM Home arrow Convenor's Column arrow Unscrambling the omelette: double dissolution granted in error

Unscrambling the omelette: double dissolution granted in error Print E-mail
Written by Professor David Flint AM   
Friday, 05 February 2010
In the continuing discussions whether a double dissolution will be sought by the government, it is generally assumed that if this is granted and the government returned without a majority in the Senate, it will be at least able to put the ETS legislation to a joint sitting.

This may not be so, and the experience of the Whitlam government illustrates this. After the double dissolution of 1974, the High Court disallowed the passing of one bill which had been the subject of the double dissolution. 

This situation can arise where the Governor-General, in good faith, has erroneously concluded that the conditions in section 57 had been fulfilled.

How to deal with a constitutional breach that cannot be undone and that has potentially far-reaching consequences is a difficult question. 

The constitutional expert Dr. Twomey recently observed that it is not uncommon for litigants in Australia to argue that there has been some significant and fundamental breach or ‘breach in sovereignty’. This often relates to the signing of the Treaty of Versailles, the appointment of the Governor-General with the "wrong" seal or the passage of the Australia Acts.

It has been argued 
that this has led to the invalidity of all laws passed for a number of decades. This has included taxation legislation.



Image
[ Even they cannot unscamble an omelette ]


While these arguments are usually dismissed by the courts as fanciful, in very rare cases the courts have found that a law, such as one concerning electoral redistributions or the holding of elections, is invalid.

What are the consequences of this? It is clear the consequences will be restricted.





...invalid electoral provisions... 



Dr Twomey points to Attorney-General (Commonwealth); Ex rel McKinlay v Commonwealth (1975) 135 CLR 1, where a majority of the High Court held that sections 3 and 4 of the Representation Act, 1905 (Cth) were invalid. The consequence was that every election since 1938 had been conducted upon the basis of invalid provisions and potentially invalid electoral boundaries.

The Court dismissed any suggestion that this meant that elections were invalidated, as were the resulting Governments and laws enacted by Parliament.

It did not explain why this was the case.




...double dissolution granted in error.... 




Dr. Twomey also refers to the opinion of the Chief Justice Sir Garfield Barwick CJ in Victoria v Commonwealth and Connor (1975) 134 CLR 81. The question concerned the potential consequences if the Governor-General had dissolved Parliament under s 57 of the Australian Constitution without the requisite constitutional conditions having been met.

Sir Garfield observed:

“The dissolution itself is a fact which can neither be void nor be undone. If, without having power to do so, the Governor-General did dissolve both Houses, there would be no basis for setting aside the dissolution or for treating it as not having occurred. None the less, the double dissolution would not have been authorized, and therefore it would not satisfy the second paragraph of s 57 and provide a warrant for a joint sitting.

"The joint sitting, pursuant to the third paragraph of that section, which was dependent upon such a dissolution, which, though not void, was not lawful, would not have power to affirm any law. It is not necessary, in my opinion, to regard any part of s 57 as directory in order to conclude that, though the proclamation be unlawful, the sequential dissolution in fact occurred and was incapable of being disregarded, reversed or done."

"Hence an unlawful dissolution was still effective, but although the new Parliament elected pursuant to the dissolution would be valid, at least one consequence would still flow from the unlawful dissolution, being the absence of power to hold a joint sitting.”



...what does this mean?....




In other words, even if the Governor-General grants a double dissolution in error, this cannot be undone. However the bill the subject of the double dissolution cannot be submitted to a subsequent joint sitting.  

This may well become a relevant consideration in relation to the government’s current ETS legislation.

 
< Prev   Next >
ROYAL VISIT 2014

Image

The Book Depository
Image
Image
Prince William: The Early Years
Prince Charles

Prince Charles

Constitutional Monarchies & Republics Compared

Image


Defend the Constitution and Flag
Australian Election Watch

10th Anniversary Neville Bonner Oration

11th Anniversary and Appeal

Crowned Republic 

   Keep The Australian Flag
Return the Governor to Government House
The Succession
The Succession
The Governor of New South Wales
Governor of New South Wales
Fiji
Fijian soldier
Media and Monarchy
Media and Monarchy
Royal Yacht Britannia
Royal Yacht Britannia
Republic Audit: Costs of Republic
Republic Audit: Costs of Republic
Reserve Powers of the Crown
Events
October 2017 November 2017
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
Week 40 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Week 41 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Week 42 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Week 43 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Week 44 29 30 31
Latest ACM News: -