That the outcome of elections held nearly two years ago has only just been determined requires some explanation. 

You might recall that on September 15, 2012 Kevin Duffy was elected a councillor on the Orange City Council.  

Mr Duffy was once a very fine cricketer. Some might argue he was unlucky not to be selected in the Orange CYMS team of the century although rumour has it he was ruled out of contention after being dismissed twice in one day by a young tearaway slow medium bowler back in 1987. 

Mr Duffy had previously resided in Borenore with his wife but in April 2012 began staying in the spare room in his son’s home in Orange taking with him his “clothing, personal items such as deodorant and toothpaste, my laptop, books, photos”. 

The reasons given for the relocation were for his job and also so that he could run for Orange City Council. His wife stayed in the Borenore property.

On December 7, 2012 John Da Rin applied to the Administrative Decisions Tribunal for an order dismissing Mr Duffy from his office. 

Although as much is not evident from the original decision of the NSW Administrative Decisions Tribunal, nor from the decision of the NSW Court of Appeal, Mr Da Rin was at the time a member of the committee of the Orange Ratepayers’ Association. And a big shout out to the Orange Ratepayers’ Association for tackling the big issues. 

Anyway, a year later, a period of time described as “languid” by the NSW Court of Appeal, the tribunal granted that application and ordered that Mr Duffy be dismissed from the civic office of councillor of Orange City Council. 

The basis of that decision was that at the time of the elections Mr Duffy was not a “resident” of the Orange City Council local government area. 

Mr Duffy appealed that decision and the appeal came before the NSW Court of Appeal.

In order to be elected as a councillor a person must be enrolled as an elector for the area, must be a resident of the area and must have lived at the enrolment address for at least one month before the enrolment. 

The Local Government Act 1993 provides that the place of residence of a person is that person’s “place of living”.  

Having looked at the relevant legislation the NSW Court of Appeal held that “a person can have a place of living whilst temporarily residing away from what might be described as his or her permanent home”. 

The tribunal in making its decision had placed particular significance on Mr Duffy’s ongoing connections with his Borenore property, namely his description of it as his “home”, the bulk of his possessions being there, and the fact that his wife remained there. 

The  NSW Court of Appeal found that the tribunal had fallen into error by weighing the connections Mr Duffy had with his alternative residences and finding that his connections with the Borenore property meant that his “place of living” could not be his son's property in Orange. 

The NSW Court of Appeal provided a sort of hindsight vindication by commenting that his move to Orange had a “genuine purpose”.

The NSW Court of Appeal therefore set aside the decision of the tribunal and in doing so stated that “the genuine purpose of qualifying to run for civic office (which implicitly was Mr Duffy’s dominant purpose) was supportive of the characterisation of Orange as the place where he was living during the relevant period”.

Having regard to the long period of time in which the question of Mr Duffy's election had been unresolved, the NSW Court of Appeal sent to the proceedings back to the tribunal but directed that Mr Da Rin’s application be dismissed.