Court Of Disputed Returns (Queensland)
The Court of Disputed Returns of Queensland is a court that adjudicates disputes concerning elections in Queensland, a state of Australia. A “disputed return” is a situation in which the result of an election is questioned. The name “disputed returns” derives from the practice in common law countries of the issuing of a writ for the election and then the parliament receiving the results by way of returns after the counting of ballots. As a result, this is why the court is named as the Court of Disputed Returns.
The court is an attempt to eliminate the partisan nature of parliament and gives the determination of electoral disputes to an independent and dispassionate neutral body. As parliament traditionally has the sole authority to determine these matters, parliament must create a special law to bring that body into existence to determine those disputes. Where there is no law, the parliament itself determines these disputes. In the Queensland situation, the parliament has decided that the court should be the only avenue for disputing an election result.
The court needs to be distinguished from the role the Supreme Court of Queensland may have had under previous federal election laws for Australia at the national level. Under the previous laws, the Supreme Court could act as the court of disputed returns for the national government in certain circumstances. This is no longer the case and instead all national election disputes are dealt with by either the High Court of Australia or the Federal Court of Australia.
Read more about Court Of Disputed Returns (Queensland): History, The Queensland Situation, Procedure, Caseload, Appeals
Famous quotes containing the words court and/or returns:
“The city is recruited from the country. In the year 1805, it is said, every legitimate monarch in Europe was imbecile. The city would have died out, rotted, and exploded, long ago, but that it was reinforced from the fields. It is only country which came to town day before yesterday, that is city and court today.”
—Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803–1882)
“If Thought is capable of being classed with Electricity, or Will with chemical affinity, as a mode of motion, it seems necessary to fall at once under the second law of thermodynamics as one of the energies which most easily degrades itself, and, if not carefully guarded, returns bodily to the cheaper form called Heat. Of all possible theories, this is likely to prove the most fatal to Professors of History.”
—Henry Brooks Adams (1838–1918)