The judge ruled that Dr Macpherson could not have someone join him as a petitioner, when he had just ruled that the [council] chief executive could join to have his interests protected.
He made the ruling after hearing council's counsel and Dr Macpherson's protest about the need for fair and public justice, but without hearing the co-petitioner application. He also ruled that [a co-petitioner joining] converted the petition into a 'new' petition and therefore had missed the deadline.
I have read the petition and submissions. In my view any judge would have found problems with delaying the 2016 Community Satisfaction Survey, information in the Pre-Election Report and publishing advertorials. But would any judge decide that these decisions had materially affected the outcomes?
No problem with the councillors' election. It only needed an additional swing of less than 1%.
But with the mayoral election, especially with the 'incredibly stupid' splitting of the anti-Chadwick vote, it needed proving another 7% swing.
