High Court rejects Victorian bid to stall donation law case

Victoria’s political donation laws will this week face a High Court challenge after the state government failed in its bid to delay the case.

Brought by independent candidates Paul Hopper and Melissa Lowe, the case challenges rules that allow registered political parties to raise funds through fundraising bodies that are not subject to the same donation caps imposed on independents.

The plaintiffs argue the arrangement, introduced by Labor in 2018, gives major parties an unfair financial advantage and breaches the Constitution’s implied freedom of political communication.

In December, the Victorian government sought to postpone the hearing, scheduled to begin on Tuesday and run for two days in total. The state argued it had introduced amendments to the contested rules, and that it would be more efficient to wait for the parliamentary process to play out.

However, in submissions to the court, the state government conceded there was no certainty its proposed changes would pass parliament, or when that might occur, given Labor does not have a majority in the upper house. “We accept that there is no certainty as to whether or when the Bill will become law,” Solicitor-General of Victoria, Alistair Pound, SC, told the court.

The Solicitor-General said parliament was due to sit the same day the hearing was scheduled to begin, and that the legislation’s passage through the upper house could not be assumed. The government argued a short delay could avoid the court having to hear the matter twice.

But the government’s bid was rejected, with the court noting the public interest in resolving the matter before the 2026 Victorian election, with both Hopper and Lowe indicating they may recontest the upcoming election as independent candidates.

“There is a public interest in the matter proceeding. The 2026 election is looming,” High Court Chief Justice Stephen Gageler said.

“To adjourn the scheduled hearing ... to await the outcome of an uncertain parliamentary process which would be dependent, at least in part, on the actions of incumbent political actors would be antithetical to the proper resolution of the issue concerning the constitutional principle which the plaintiffs seek to vindicate.”

The application was dismissed, with costs, meaning taxpayers will pay the independent candidates’ legal costs for opposing the delay.

The Victorian case comes amid growing legal scrutiny of political donation laws. In December, The Age revealed former independent MPs Zoe Daniel and Rex Patrick were also preparing a High Court challenge to recent federal reforms.

They have argued changes to the Commonwealth’s electoral laws also favour major parties and restrict political competition, raising similar constitutional questions to the Victorian system.

The state government’s submission has raised questions about its confidence in securing passage of its proposed amendments, given its concession that the bill’s progress and timing were uncertain.

The amendments, introduced in December, followed the government’s concession in the High Court that parts of the existing donations regime were discriminatory.

In 2018, Labor overhauled donation laws by introducing caps that restricted donations from any individual or organisation to $4850 over a four-year period.

But major parties were allowed to keep using long-established fundraising vehicles (known as “nominated entities”) that had decades of stockpiled cash and investment income, and could donate uncapped amounts to the major parties.

Late last year the government conceded in its High Court defence that a deadline locking out newer political parties from establishing similar fundraising arms was “discriminatory” and “not justified” and must be “severed”.

In response, it proposed changes that would allow independents and new parties the chance to set up nominated entities for the first time, while imposing new restrictions on how those entities can operate, including limits on how much money can be transferred during an election period.

Hopper now leads the West Party, which is planning to field candidates to run across Melbourne’s west at the 2026 state election.

He told The Age the amendments proposed by the government were still not fair. “It was clearly aimed at them still protecting their home ground advantage … and making it harder for newer parties or independent candidates,” he said.

“It’s vitally important the matter is heard. We are in an election year, and we want to campaign now.”

The bill also proposes changes to early voting arrangements and election administration, including reducing the early voting period from 12 days to 10 and adjusting timelines for party registration and ballot preparation.

A Victorian government spokesperson said the proposed reforms would strengthen transparency and make elections fairer. But they declined to comment on the High Court’s rejection of the delay bid or the associated legal costs, citing the matter as being before the courts.

The outcome of the High Court case will likely shape how political campaigns are funded ahead of the 2026 state election.

Get the day’s breaking news, entertainment ideas and a long read to enjoy. Sign up to receive our Evening Edition newsletter.