Choudhry and Others v Treisman
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 31 March 2003 |
| Neutral Citation | [2003] EWHC 1203 (Ch),[2003] EWHC 695 (Ch) |
| Date | 31 March 2003 |
| Court | Chancery Division |
CHANCERY DIVISION
Before Mr Justice Stanley Burnton.
Electoral law - political party barring election candidates from standing in its name - except in exceptional circumstances court will not grant mandatory relief
Save in the most exceptional circumstances, the court should not compel a registered political party to allow a candidate to stand for election in its name if the party had genuine and substantial concerns as to the regularity and honesty of the process by which the candidate had been selected.
Mr Justice Stanley Burnton so held in the Chancery Division in dismissing the applications of six Labour Party candidates, including Mr Azad Choudhry, for interim injunctive relief requiring the party, represented by its general secretary, Mr David Treisman, to nominate them for the local government elections due to take place on May 1, 2003 and preventing the party from submitting nominations for any other persons in the candidates' places.
Each of the candidates had been correctly selected by the process under the Labour Party Rule Book to stand for the elections in various wards in Nottingham.
After serious allegations had been made relating to the selection process and membership of the candidates, the NEC disputes panel, a sub-committee of the National Executive Committee, the administrative authority of the party, resolved that a member of the disputes panel should oversee an investigation by the regional board into the allegations and, if necessary, should authorise any subsequent imposition of candidates.
The investigating panel, after rejecting the selection process on the ground that it was unsound, decided to oppose the candidates and impose others in their place, although there was no suggestion of wrongdoing on the part of the candidates.
The candidates applied for interlocutory injunctions on the grounds, inter alia:
(i) that the NEC lacked the power under the rules to remove them and impose alternative candidates; (ii) that the NEC lacked the power to delegate its authority to the disputes panel and then on to the investigation panel; (iii) that the panel's decision had been rendered unlawful by a breach of the rules of natural justice; and (iv) that the relief sought was appropriate in the circumstances.
The interim applications were urgent since nominations had to have been submitted by April 1, 2003.
Mr Philip Coppel for the candidates; Mr John Cavanagh, QC and Mr Nigel...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hayes v Pack and Others
...application should be refused save in exceptional circumstances. He placed particular reliance on the decisions in Choudry v Triesman [2003] EWHC 1203 (Ch), Nattrass v UK Independent Party [2013] EWHC 3017 (Ch), and Hayes v Sarah Virginia, Baroness Brinton [2019] EWHC 1785 49 In Choudry m......
-
Evangelou and Others v McNicol (sued as a representative of all members of the Labour Party except the Claimants)
...that this claim was prepared in good time and in good order. The Labour Party Rule Book: The Law 8 As recognised by this court in Choudhry v Treisman [2003] EWHC 1203 (Ch) ("Choudhry"), the Labour Party is an unincorporated association with rules, currently set out in the Rule Book, which c......
-
Michael Nattrass v UK Independence Party
...circumstances before it interferes with the selection processes of a political party and, just as Mr. Justice Stanley Burton in Choudhry v Triesman [2003] EWHC 1203 (Ch), declined to compel a registered political party to allow candidates to stand if the party had genuine and substantial co......