| Sykes v Cleary | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Court | High Court of Australia as the Court of Disputed Returns |
| Decided | 25 November 1992 |
| Citations | [1992] HCA 60, (1992) 176 CLR 77 |
| Case history | |
| Prior actions | Sykes v Cleary [1992] HCA 32, (1992) 107 ALR 577; (1992) 66 ALJR 577 |
| Court membership | |
| Judges sitting | Mason CJ, Brennan, Deane, Dawson, Toohey, Gaudron & McHugh JJ |
| Case opinions | |
| 6:1 A teacher employed by a State held an "office of profit under the Crown" within the meaning of s 44(iv) and so was "incapable of being chosen" . 5:2 A dual citizen will be disqualified unless they have taken all reasonable steps to renounce the other citizenship. | |
Sykes v Cleary[1][note 1] was a significant decision of the High Court of Australia sitting as the Court of Disputed Returns on 25 November 1992. The case was a leading decision on Section 44 of the Constitution of Australia, dealing with both what constitutes an office of profit under the Crown and allegiance to a foreign power. The majority held that a teacher employed by the State of Victoria held an "office of profit under the Crown" within the meaning of s 44(iv) and so was "incapable of being chosen". A person who held dual citizenship was incapable of being chosen unless they had taken all reasonable steps to renounce the other citizenship.
- ^ Sykes v Cleary [1992] HCA 60, (1992) 176 CLR 77.
Cite error: There are <ref group=note> tags on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=note}} template (see the help page).