Burnley Local Government Election, Re

Burnley Local Government Election, Re

A ballot paper marked elsewhere than in the proper place and otherwise than by means of a cross is not void for uncertainty if the intention of the voter clearly appears. The disputed ballot paper MAP2 showed a clear intention to vote for Mr Reynolds and was therefore valid.

Parties
Petitioner: Michelle Anne Pilling; Petitioner: Scott Atkinson; Petitioner: Susan McDevitt; Petitioner: Ian Smith; Respondent: Paul Reynolds; Respondent: Stephen Rumbelow
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 February 2008
Procedural Posture
Election Petition / Judgment After Special Case Stated
Outcome
petition dismissed
Legal Topics
Validity of Ballot Papers, Interpretation of Election Rules, Costs in Public Law Litigation
Election Law Public Law Validity of Ballot Papers Interpretation of Election Rules Costs in Public Law Litigation

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 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michelle Anne Pilling

Petitioner

Scott Atkinson

Petitioner

Susan McDevitt

Petitioner

Ian Smith

Petitioner

Paul Reynolds

Respondent

Stephen Rumbelow

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Election Petition / Judgment After Special Case Stated

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a ballot paper marked elsewhere than in the proper place and otherwise than by means of a cross is void for uncertainty under the 2006 Rules r.47(1)(d) and r.47(3)
  2. 2 Whether the intention of the voter clearly appears from the disputed ballot paper MAP2

Ratio Decidendi

A ballot paper marked elsewhere than in the proper place and otherwise than by means of a cross is not void for uncertainty if the intention of the voter clearly appears. The disputed ballot paper MAP2 showed a clear intention to vote for Mr Reynolds and was therefore valid.

Court Disposition

petition dismissed

Orders

  • Mr Reynolds was duly elected.
  • Costs awarded: £20,000 to the Second Respondent and £10,000 to the First Respondent.