The high court has rejected a last-ditch case from Rodney Culleton to declare he is still a senator and maintain his pay and privileges until an appeal against his bankruptcy or the high court challenge to his eligibility are concluded.

The court, sitting as the the court of disputed returns, decided on Tuesday to dismiss Culleton’s bid to summon the president of the Senate and declined to grant any order to allow Culleton to continue calling himself a senator.

Speaking after the judgment, Culleton restated his position that he was a senator unless and until a court orders otherwise.

Asked why Justice Stephen Gageler had not found he was a senator, Culleton said: “Well, he didn’t say I wasn’t, either.”

Culleton claimed the decision merely amounted to the court deciding to wait until the judgment in the main case challenging his eligibility, although that was no part of Gageler’s reasoning.

The court’s reasons hinted that a decision in the main case could come before the Senate resumes on 7 February, which may provide the definitive ruling Culleton is not a senator.

Gageler found that Culleton’s bankruptcy fell outside the matter referred to the high court, his annulled conviction for larceny.

Therefore it was not not necessary to restore Culleton’s privileges as a senator in order to preserve the status quo before the high court makes its decision on the larceny conviction.

At a hearing in Canberra on Tuesday morning, Culleton’s counsel, Peter King, told the court that the president of the Senate, Stephen Parry, had no authority to eject Culleton from his position.

Parry notified the Western Australian governor on 11 January that Culleton’s Senate seat was vacant because of his bankruptcy, which was declared by the federal court on 23 December.

In the hearing King accused Parry of taking away Culleton’s staff, allowance and privileges on the “assumption” his seat was vacant, which he said could only be determined by the high court or the Senate itself. He labelled this an “overreach” and “usurpation” of the court’s authority.

Complaining that the commonwealth had referred to “Mr Culleton” in its submissions, King won a small symbolic victory when Gageler said he would continue to refer to him as “Senator Culleton” for the purposes of the case.

Culleton later seized on this outside court to claim that Gageler had acknowledged he was a senator, when no such finding was made.

If Culleton had won the case he might not have remained in the Senate for long. In order to do so, he would had to have won an appeal to the full federal court against his bankruptcy and win the high court case on whether he is ineligible because of a larceny conviction, since annulled, but still on the books at the time of his election.

The Senate also has the power to determine its own composition, meaning it could formally eject Culleton after it resumes on 7 February by reason of his bankruptcy.

King argued that because the reference from the Senate asked the court to consider the conviction and “any other reason” Culleton may be ineligible, Parry had pre-empted an issue the court was itself set to consider.

The attorney general’s counsel, Neil Williams, told the court the case before it dealt only with the narrow question of Culleton’s annulled conviction, not the bankruptcy, so Parry was within his rights to act on the fresh reason for his ineligibility.

Williams argued there was not “irremediable harm” to Culleton’s seat being declared vacant, because the effect was only that Culleton was not being paid. There was no suggestion his seat would be filled until the other cases were resolved, he said.

Culleton’s chief of staff, Margaret Menzel, was present in court. Menzel cleared out Culleton’s parliamentary office on Thursday, but said she and other staff would help him fight on despite the fact they will not be paid from next week.

Gageler said costs for the application would be exempt from any order that the commonwealth pay Culleton’s costs, meaning the former senator will pay his own costs.