United States legal-change intelligence across legislation, regulation, and case law. Separate data plane, same Zoe spine.

Platform

Legislation
Cases
Ask Zoe
Recently analysed

Company

Pricing
API
X
LinkedIn
Instagram

Jurisdictions

Federal
Supreme Court

District of Columbia

© 2026 Zoe. All rights reserved.

Zoe is a legal information platform. Always consult the official source for authoritative text.

Mitchell v Bailey - [2008] FCA 692 - FCA 2008 case summary — Zoe

Legislation Cases Absurdities Ask Zoe Graph Pricing

Home/Cases/[2008] FCA 692

CTHFCA

Mitchell v Bailey

[2008] FCA 692

Federal Court of Australia|2008-07-02|Before: Crennan J, Tracey J

View original source

At a glance

Source facts

Court

Federal Court of Australia

Decision date

2008-07-02

Before

Crennan J, Tracey J

Source

Original judgment source is linked above.

Judgment (3 paragraphs)

[1]

Unable to reallocate this vote because there is no discernable figure 1.

[2]

Unable to reallocate this vote because there are two figure 1s.

[3]

Unable to reallocate this vote because there are two figures 2s and there is no clear preference for Mitchell or Bailey.

Parties

Applicant/Plaintiff:

Mitchell

Respondent/Defendant:

Bailey

Legislation Cited (8)

Electoral Act 1918(Cth)ss 20, 21, 209, 209A, 240, 263, 265, 267, 268, 274, 279, 279B, 280, 281, 284, 352, 353, 354, 355, 360, 361, 362, 363, 363A, Schedule

Electoral Act 1902(Cth)ss 157, 158, 173, 180, 181, s 157).

Local Government (Election) Regulation 1993(NSW)

Elections Act 1983(Qld)

Acts Interpretation Act 1901(Cth)s 22(1)(j)

Electoral and Referendum Regulations 1918(Cth)reg 76

Public Service Act 1999(Cth)

Local Government Act 1993(NSW)

Cases Cited (11)

(1920) 27 CLR 449

(1998) 83 FCR 113

(1996) 92 LGERA 329

(1996) 186 CLR 302

(1949) 78 CLR 353

(1972) 128 CLR 28

(1976) 135 CLR 110

(1996) 185 CLR 259

(1962) 111 CLR 518

(1907) 4 CLR 1481

Cited By (3)

Babet v Electoral Commissioner

Mitchell v Bailey

Scott-Irving v Oakeshott