header-logo header-logo

26 May 2017 / Athelstane Aamodt
Issue: 7747 / Categories: Features , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

Court out

nlj_7747_athelstane

In the run up to the General Election, Athelstane Aamodt explains how the Election Court operates

As lawyers know, there are all sorts of courts and tribunals in the UK whose function depends on the matter to be decided. For the most part they derive their existence and the limits of their powers from statutes and statutory instruments. They are familiar to us: the Employment Tribunal, the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber), the First-Tier Tax Tribunal, and so forth. They all have their quirks and idiosyncrasies. Of all the courts in the UK, however, none is quite as unusual as the Election Court.

The law expressly allows people to question the outcome of parliamentary elections as well as European Parliament elections, local elections, Welsh assembly elections and local referendums by presenting a petition, which is essentially a claim form, that sets out the reasons for questioning the election and the relief that is sought by the petitioner.

Petition requirements

To be able to petition—by way of example—a parliamentary election, the petitioner needs to be one of the following:

  • a
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

Ward Hadaway—19 promotions

Ward Hadaway—19 promotions

19 promotions across national offices, including two new partners

Brabners—Ruth Hargreaves

Brabners—Ruth Hargreaves

Partner promoted to head of corporate team

Slater Heelis—Liam Hall, Jordan Bear & Joe Madigan

Slater Heelis—Liam Hall, Jordan Bear & Joe Madigan

Chester office expansion accelerates with triple appointment

NEWS
As AI chatbots increasingly provide legal and commercial advice, English law is beginning to confront who should bear responsibility when automated systems get things wrong
Businesses are facing a ‘dramatic rise in prosecution risks’ as sweeping reforms to corporate criminal liability come into force, expanding the net of who can be held responsible for wrongdoing inside organisations
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys has reignited debate over what exactly counts as the ‘conduct of litigation’ in modern legal practice
A controversial High Court financial remedies ruling has reignited debate over secrecy, non-disclosure and fairness in divorce proceedings involving hidden wealth
Britain’s deferred prosecution agreement regime is undergoing a significant shift, with prosecutors placing renewed emphasis on corporate cooperation, reform and early self-reporting
back-to-top-scroll