Sentences with phrase «election court»

Syracuse, N.Y. — New citizens, parolees and college students whose voter registrations have gotten lost in some bureaucratic paperwork shuffle are showing up today at Election Court at the Onondaga County Board of Elections.

Former immigration minister Phil Woolas» re-election to his Oldham East and Saddleworth seat has been declared void, a special election court has ruled.

Labour MP Phil Woolas ran a «dirty tricks» campaign in a bid to «make the white folk angry», an unusual election court heard yesterday.

He reckons this week's extraordinary election court case against the Labour MP for Oldham East and Saddleworth, Phil Woolas, will have a profound effect on British elections.

Woolas has since been stripped of his seat in parliament by a special election court, which ruled that he knowingly made false statements about his Lib Dem opponent, and suspended from the Labour Party.

There is no doubt that Labour and the Tories will try to obscure their own failings in the East End — not to mention nationally — by running solely on the back of an election court judgment that Lutfur Rahman intends to appeal.

Under the Representation of the People Act 1983, an election court petitioned to investigate an election has certain duties, including producing a report of the investigation.

The report of the election court under section 144 or section 145 above shall state the names of all persons (if any) who have been proved at the trial to have been guilty of any corrupt or illegal practice...

Pretty much all the left press other than Solidarity [Workers Liberty's paper] has denounced the election court decision against Lutfur Rahman, mayor of Tower Hamlets in East London, and most of the left has backed Rabina Khan, Rahman's ally, for the new mayoral election on 11 June.

Deputy Labour leader says Woolas would not be reinstated even if he were to win the appeal against election court's decision

The news is leaking out of a substantial rebellion — «carnage» said one report — at last night's parliamentary party meeting in opposition to the decisive action taken over Phil Woolas, suspending him from membership following the decision of the election court.

It is a three - way fight in a marginal seat caused by the ousting of the former Labour MP Phil Woolas, who was found guilty by an election court of lying about his Liberal Democrat opponent in campaign literature.

On 9 December, an Election Court decided that although he had told a «blatant lie» in a TV interview, it had not been proven beyond reasonable doubt that he had committed an «illegal practice» under the Representation of the People Act [219] and he was allowed to retain his seat.

We also asked for the first reactions to former Minister of State for Borders and Immigration Phil Woolas MP being ejected from Parliament after an election court found he had lied about a rival in his election leaflets.

In 2013, a Cobb Superior Court judge ruled that a candidate has «no compelling reason» to view absentee ballots in an election office after a candidate competed in an election

A candidate reported by an election court as personally guilty of an illegal practice is required to vacate their seat in the House of Commons as from the date of the court's decision (Friday 5 November).

After the decision by the election court concerning Phil Woolas, the Member for Oldham East and Saddleworth, the Speaker of the House of Commons reported the court's decision to the House in a statement on Monday.

Woolas was re-elected in the 2010 General Election, although the result would later be overturned by an election court.

The by - election was called after an election court declared last year's contest void after finding that Labour victor Phil Woolas had made false statements about the Lib Dem candidate Elwyn Watkins.

After the review ruling, a Labour spokesman said, «The Labour Party administratively suspended Phil Woolas after the original judgment of the election court.

[63] Although the verdict of the election court indicated a prima facie breach of criminal law, in March 2011 the Crown Prosecution Service announced that it would not bring criminal charges against Woolas as the finding of the Election Court already disqualified him from holding elected office and they felt that this was sufficient punishment.

[60] The court granted Woolas permission to bring judicial review and that review overturned one of the three breaches of the section 106 of the Representation of the People Act 1983 found by the Election Court.

«Though the election court upheld my disqualification, the law was later changed to allow me to take my seat and I hope that if David Davis wins this by - election Parliament will repeal the law which led him to resign.»

This represents a change in stance for the leader's office, who on Friday were briefing selected lobby journalists that Phil Woolas political career «is over», as a result of the election court ruling.

These people then went to the Election Court at the Onondaga County Board of Elections, where they had the chance to have their cases heard.

Walsh, one of two commissioners for Onondaga County, said the Election Court is hearing cases all day Tuesday and granting most of appeals to allow people to vote.

An election court could declare the election void, but if criminal charges were brought an MP would be disqualified only if they were sentenced to prison.

However, an election court gave the seat to the Tory runner - up, Malcolm St Clair.

After losing the 2010 general election by 103 votes, Liberal Democrat candidate Elwyn Watkins submitted a petition for a hearing by an election court, claiming that campaign literature issued by his Labour opponent Phil Woolas breached the Representation of the People Act 1983 by making false statements about his personal character.

[7][8] On 5 November 2010, the election court [n 6] upheld the petition and declared the election void after finding Phil Woolas guilty of making false election statements.

[9][10][11] Woolas sought a judicial review of the decision in the Administrative Division of the High Court, which upheld the decision of the Election Court in relation to two statements, whilst quashing the decision in relation to a third.

Nick Clegg's party missed out on the seat by just 104 votes in May, but the result was declared void last month by an election court that found that Woolas had made false statements about his Lib Dem rival Elwyn Watkins.