Madden v. Muise

Madden v. Muise

Two eligible District 5 electors were erroneously diverted and voted in District 1 on ordinary polling day in breach of MEA provisions (ss.82,41A,73); the diversion constituted non-compliance of a type listed in s.164 (as to the taking of the poll and prescribed forms) and, applying the magic number test, the two diverted votes equalled the margin of defeat and placed the winner in doubt; s.164 therefore does not bar relief and under s.158(1) the District 5 election is void.

Citation
2013 NSSC 35
Parties
Applicant: Malcolm Madden; Respondent (clerk/cao): Alain Muise; Respondent (returning Officer): Raymond E. Surette; Respondent (candidate/observer): Nicole J. Albright
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 January 2013
Procedural Posture
Application Under the Municipal Elections Act to Void Municipal Election / Decision on Application (judgment)
Outcome
Application allowed; October 2012 District 5 municipal councillor election declared void
Legal Topics
Voiding Election, Elector Qualification, Election Irregularities, Statutory Interpretation, Costs
Source Language
English
Municipal Law Election Law Administrative Law Voiding Election Elector Qualification Election Irregularities Statutory Interpretation Costs

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Malcolm Madden

Applicant

Alain Muise

Respondent (clerk/cao)

Raymond E. Surette

Respondent (returning Officer)

Nicole J. Albright

Respondent (candidate/observer)

Procedural Posture

Application Under the Municipal Elections Act to Void Municipal Election / Decision on Application (judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether non-compliance with the Municipal Elections Act occurred
  2. 2 Whether the non-compliance falls within types listed in s.164 MEA
  3. 3 Whether the election was conducted in accordance with the principles of the MEA

Ratio Decidendi

Two eligible District 5 electors were erroneously diverted and voted in District 1 on ordinary polling day in breach of MEA provisions (ss.82,41A,73); the diversion constituted non-compliance of a type listed in s.164 (as to the taking of the poll and prescribed forms) and, applying the magic number test, the two diverted votes equalled the margin of defeat and placed the winner in doubt; s.164 therefore does not bar relief and under s.158(1) the District 5 election is void.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; October 2012 District 5 municipal councillor election declared void

Orders

  • Declare the October 2012 election for Councillor for District 5 of the Municipality of the District of Argyle void pursuant to s.158(1) MEA
  • Order the Municipality of the District of Argyle to pay costs to the Applicant Malcolm Madden in the amount of 1250 CAD forthwith