At its root, the issue concerns the potential to breach the secrecy of the ballot. The judge found that there was evidence that convinced him that most of the invalid proxy votes would have been cast for the unsuccessful party. The presence of proxy voting is a distinguishing factor which cannot be discounted. Proxy voting provides a basis for drawing an inference as to who the ballots were cast for without breaching the secrecy of the ballot. We cannot do the same here. Nonetheless, counsel for the respondent took up an observation made in the decision. The supporters of a candidate could engage in improper practices, then, if that candidate lost the election, they could challenge the results on the basis of their own improper conduct. If those invalid ballots exceeded the majority, and no further account was taken, the unsuccessful party could succeed in obtaining new election (see Beamish v. Miltenberger, supra, at para. 187). There is no evidence of such conduct here, but, from this, counsel suggested that it was open to the court to consider how the invalid votes would have been cast in its determination as to whether the results of the election had been affected. I find there is nothing to support this idea and nothing to suggest any basis on which this kind of analysis could be undertaken. I will not engage in what would be nothing more than speculation as to which candidate ballots may have been cast for. Assessing the "irregularities"
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.