header-logo header-logo

08 May 2015
Issue: 7651 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Elections

Re Representation of the People Act 1983; Re Mayoral Election for the London Borough of Tower Hamlets held on 22 May 2014 sub nom Erlam and others v Rahman and another [2015] Lexis Citation 58, [2015] All ER (D) 197 (Apr)

Four electors in the London Borough of Tower Hamlets (the Borough) brought a petition under the Representation of the People Act 1983, challenging the Mayoral Election in the Borough held on 22 May 2014. The Queen’s Bench Division held that the majority of the allegations in the petition had been made out and that the election of the first respondent as Mayor of the Borough was avoided by such corrupt or illegal practices pursuant to s 159(1) of the 1983 Act and also to have been avoided on the ground of general corruption pursuant to s 164(1)(a) of the 1983 Act.

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