Knight v Nicholls & Anor [2004] EWCA Civ 68 (29 January 2004)
The returning officer's statutory obligation to 'issue' postal ballot papers is fulfilled by sending them to the voter's address via an authorised carrier. The risk of non-delivery by the carrier falls on the voter, mitigated by the replacement ballot procedure in Regulation 78. There is no strict liability on the returning officer for failures of the postal service, and the election cannot be invalidated on this ground if the officer has taken all appropriate steps.
- Citation
- [2004] EWCA Civ 68
- Parties
- Appellant: Martin Christopher Knight; First Respondent: Jill Cheryl Nicholls; Second Respondent: Andrew Sparke (Returning Officer)
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 29 January 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Election Petition Appeal / Appeal From High Court (queen's Bench Division) to Court of Appeal
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Postal Voting, Returning Officer Duties, Interpretation of Statutory Obligations, Article 3 First Protocol ECHR
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Martin Christopher Knight
Appellant
Jill Cheryl Nicholls
First Respondent
Andrew Sparke (Returning Officer)
Second Respondent
Procedural Posture
Election Petition Appeal / Appeal From High Court (queen's Bench Division) to Court of Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 What is the extent of the obligation on a returning officer to 'issue' postal ballot papers to voters under Rule 19 of the Local Elections (Principal Area) Rules 1986?
- 2 Does failure of delivery by the postal carrier amount to a breach by the returning officer?
- 3 Should the election be declared invalid under section 48 of the Representation of the People Act 1983 due to non-delivery of postal ballots?
Ratio Decidendi
The returning officer's statutory obligation to 'issue' postal ballot papers is fulfilled by sending them to the voter's address via an authorised carrier. The risk of non-delivery by the carrier falls on the voter, mitigated by the replacement ballot procedure in Regulation 78. There is no strict liability on the returning officer for failures of the postal service, and the election cannot be invalidated on this ground if the officer has taken all appropriate steps.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Petitioner to pay the first respondent's costs
- Petitioner to pay the second respondent's costs
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment