Menu My portfolio: 0

News

Supreme Court gives judgment in election expenses case

Related Member(s):
Clare Montgomery QC, Sarah Hannett
Related Practice Area(s):
Election Law

The Supreme Court held that there is no requirement for property, goods, services or facilities transferred to or provided for the use or benefit of a candidate free of charge or at a discount to be authorised by the candidate or his or her election agent in order to constitute election expenses.

Clare Montgomery QC and Sarah Hannett appeared on behalf of the third defendant, Marion Little.

For judgment and summary, please see here.