header-logo header-logo

Voter identification: what’s lawful?

01 July 2022 / Nicholas Dobson
Issue: 7985 / Categories: Features , Public
printer mail-detail
86371
Nicholas Dobson examines the courts’ treatment of recent pilot schemes requiring voter identification in local elections
  • The Supreme Court has ruled that pilot schemes and orders under s 10 of the Representation of the People Act 2000 making different provision as to how voting at specified local elections was to take place were lawful and authorised for a lawful purpose.

Although it seems that Shakespeare’s Cleopatra was able to ‘make defect perfection’, she was clearly exceptional. For human beings and their systems are generally experienced as less than perfect. The election system may be a case in point. Back in 2005, Richard Mawrey QC in the Election Court found (in respect of a Birmingham City Council election) ‘evidence of electoral fraud that would disgrace a banana republic’. And in his Tower Hamlets Election Court judgment of 23 April 2015 (Re Mayoral Election for the London Borough of Tower Hamlets held on 22 May 2014 sub nom Erlam and others v R [2015] EWHC 1215 (QB), [2015] All ER (D) 197 (Apr)),

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll