Foster v McNicol & Anor [2016] EWHC 1966 (QB) (28 July 2016)

Clause II.2B(ii) of the Labour Party Rule Book, properly interpreted, does not require the incumbent leader to obtain nominations to stand in a leadership ballot when challenged. Only challengers must meet the nomination threshold. The NEC's decision was legally correct.

Citation: [2016] EWHC 1966
Parties: Claimant: Michael Foster; First Defendant: Iain McNicol; Second Defendant: The Rt Hon Jeremy Corbyn MP
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 28 July 2016
Procedural Posture: Claim for Interpretation of Labour Party Rules / Final Judgment at First Instance
Outcome: Claim dismissed
Legal Topics: Interpretation of Party Rules, Nomination Requirements for Leadership Ballot, Jurisdiction of NEC Versus Courts

Contract Law Association Law Election Law Interpretation of Party Rules Nomination Requirements for Leadership Ballot Jurisdiction of NEC Versus Courts

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2

Parties

Michael Foster

Claimant

Iain McNicol

First Defendant

The Rt Hon Jeremy Corbyn MP

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Claim for Interpretation of Labour Party Rules / Final Judgment at First Instance

Legal Issues

1 Whether Labour Party rules require incumbent leader to obtain nominations to stand in leadership ballot
2 Whether NEC's interpretation of rules is final or subject to court review

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

Mr Corbyn is entitled to stand in the leadership ballot without obtaining nominations.
The NEC's decision is upheld.