Section 288:

288. Allocation—Under regulation 16 (2) of the Legislative Assembly Regulations 1968, respondent No. 1 was required, by the end of nomination day, to allocate symbols of identification to electoral candidates. Prior to nomination day the applicant indicated to respondent No. 1 that he wished to use a sunflower as his symbol of identification in the forthcoming by-election. Respondent No. 1 declined the request on the ground that the sunflower was similar to another symbol which incorporated a sun with rays enclosing a heart, used by a party at the last general election. The applicant sought to have the decision quashed. HELD respondent No. 1 should not have assumed that the sun ray symbol would be used by any party at the by-election, and should have sought the approval of respondent no. 2 on the decision. The applicant should have been told that, in the event of another party using the sun ray symbol, another symbol would be allocated to the applicant. If it transpired that the party which used the sun ray symbol at the last election sought to use it again at the by-election, the Court would be reluctant to interfere in a decision by the respondent to allocate another symbol to the applicant. Michel v Electoral Commissioner (1992). M. Writ of Election