Murphy v The Electoral Commission

Murphy v The Electoral Commission

Section 124 of PPERA only requires the Commission to return the original GOL Return upon request after two years; it does not impose a duty to destroy copies or cease publication. No private law cause of action arises for breach of statutory duty or conversion; the proper remedy is judicial review. The claim is misconceived and an abuse of process.

Parties
Claimant: Richard Murphy; Defendant: The Electoral Commission
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 October 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil / Strike Out Application and Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim struck out
Legal Topics
Statutory Interpretation, Breach of Statutory Duty, Conversion, Exclusivity Principle, Exemplary Damages
Administrative Law Electoral Law Statutory Interpretation Breach of Statutory Duty Conversion Exclusivity Principle Exemplary Damages

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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Richard Murphy

Claimant

The Electoral Commission

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Strike Out Application and Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether section 124 of PPERA imposes a duty to return or destroy all copies of referendum returns and cease publication
  2. 2 Whether breach of section 124 gives rise to a private law cause of action for breach of statutory duty
  3. 3 Whether breach gives rise to a private law cause of action for conversion

Ratio Decidendi

Section 124 of PPERA only requires the Commission to return the original GOL Return upon request after two years; it does not impose a duty to destroy copies or cease publication. No private law cause of action arises for breach of statutory duty or conversion; the proper remedy is judicial review. The claim is misconceived and an abuse of process.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out

Orders

  • Claim struck out pursuant to CPR 3.1 and 3.4