header-logo header-logo

18 July 2014
Issue: 7615 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Elections

Mabbutt (on his own behalf and on behalf of the Conservative Party) [2014] EWHC 2244 (QB), [2014] All ER (D) 86 (Jul)

The focus of a court’s inquiry in connection with reg 108(3)(b) of the European Parliamentary Elections Regulations 2004 (SI 2004/293) was the act or omission and the good faith (or otherwise) of the applicant for relief. Correspondingly, if the application was successful it was the applicant who was relieved from any liability or consequences in respect of the errors which prompted the application. It might be said that the closing words of reg 108 appeared at first sight to have a wider impact, but should be interpreted as meaning, “and upon the making of the order no such person shall be subject to any of the consequences under these Regulations of that act or omission”. Were it otherwise, a person who should be entitled to relief would be denied it because of the nature of someone else’s act or because of their bad faith. That would not be consistent with the intention of the regulation, which was to provide a mechanism for relief for an applicant

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll