Corbyn wins again!
![Jeremy Corbyn did not attend the High Court to hear the judgement [Image: Peter Nicholls/Reuters].](https://voxpoliticalonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/160728-Jeremy-Corbyn-Peter-Nicholls-Reuters.png)
Jeremy Corbyn did not attend the High Court to hear the judgement [Image: Peter Nicholls/Reuters].
Mr Foster launched his legal challenge after Labour’s National Executive Committee ruled that Mr Corbyn did not have to collect nominations from fellow Labour MPs as he was the incumbent, not a challenger.
There’s not a lot to add, although it may be worth pointing out that Mr Corbyn, a man who has been described by challengers to his leadership and the right-wing media as a “loser”, just keeps on winning.
In his three-page judgement, Mr Justice Foskett said the court’s decision was on a narrow point of law and unaffected by political considerations.
He said his interpretation of Labour’s leadership rules was that “the leader would not in that situation (where there is no vacancy) be someone who was a ‘challenger’ for the leadership and, accordingly, would require no nominations in order to compete in the ballot to retain his/her position as leader”.
It concluded: “Accordingly, the judge accepted that the decision of the NEC was correct and that Mr Corbyn was entitled to be a candidate in the forthcoming election without the need for nominations.”
Reacting to the judgement, leadership challenger Mr Smith said he was pleased, saying the court had “done the right thing”.
“This now puts to bed any questions about the process, so we can get on with discussing the issues that really matter,” he added, saying he looked forward to debating his rival “as often as possible about our plans for Labour’s future”.
Source: Labour leadership: Corbyn ballot challenge rejected – BBC News
Here’s Mr Corbyn’s comment:
[Mr] Corbyn, who was not in court, also welcomed the decision, denouncing the case as “a waste of time and resources when our party should have been holding the government to account”.He added: “There should have been no question of the right of half a million Labour party members to choose their own leader being overturned. If anything, the aim should be to expand the number of voters in this election. I hope all candidates and supporters will reject any attempt to prolong this process, and that we can now proceed with the election in a comradely and respectful manner.”
Source: Jeremy Corbyn fights off court challenge over Labour leadership ballot | Politics | The Guardian
ADVERT
Join the Vox Political Facebook page.
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:
Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.
Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfaZ-VYgnOU
Can all commenters PLEASE state the nature of YouTube links when you post them?
I’m going to start trashing them, starting with the next one I see that comes without an explanation.
sorry….x
“Good News again” and of course I believe Smith when he states he is pleased with the decision, Aye Right!!!!!!!
Have to say Mike, I’m sort of a bit surprised at Owen Smith’s reaction! I would have thought he would have welcomed the idea of Mr Corbyn having to secure nominations in order to be on the ballot (because he would know it wouldn’t be easy for him?)(although I seem to recall you saying something to the effect that you didn’t think he would have a difficult time in that department?)
However, there is also the point that perhaps Mr Smith reacted like that, in order to be seen by the public to be more ‘democratic’, in order to try and score himself some political points???????
Yes indeed.
Who paid for these legal bills. I bet they must have hired very expensive lawyers!!!
It is not Corbyn wins. It is NEC wins. As a Conservative, I am very pleased with the result and that the result will not be appealed. I now look forward to JC winning the election followed by Labour tearing itself apart.
Technically it is indeed the NEC that won.
Actually, Corbyn won because the decision was in favour of his candidacy.
Once again Jeremy a man of character and honesty wins against the gobby Welsh windbag. Look what happened to Labour when we last had a Welsh windbag as leader.
For Gods sake why can’t these backstabbing, loser snakes realise that Labour would be miles ahead in the polls if they got behind Jeremy and supported him?
Living in Wales as I do, I think you should qualify your remarks to show that not all Welsh people are windbags, but Neil Kinnock was nicknamed the Welsh Windbag and you were making a comparison with Owen Smith, who is also a windbag (in your opinion) who happens to come from Wales.
I know that’s cumbersome but otherwise you come across as anti-Welsh when I hope you want to appear anti-Owen Smith.
Sorry for any offence Mike, and the whole Welsh nation, I thought it was clear that I was just talking about Kinnock and Smith.
Even the rich donor can not subvent the Law in the way he hoped. First JC was deemed to be “unelectable”, then he was a monstrous bully frightening all those poor sensitive lady MP’s in the Party now he is legally entitled to be on the ballot paper! What will Smith’s “Team” come up with next??
I by no means like to criticize the BBC but one again their reporting seems highly suspect. This time it is to do with the “ticker” that runs along the bottom of the screen on BBC News.
This afternoon it read something like:
“Jeremy Corbyn has welcomed the High Court decision to uphold his right to remain on the Labour leadership ballot *despite lacking the required support of his MPs*”
The first part of that sentence is reproduced from memory but the end starting with “despite” is quoted exactly as it appeared on-screen.
Later on it had been altered to read:
“Labour Party donor Michael Foster loses High Court bid to overturn party decision to allow Jeremy Corbyn to remain on the ballot *despite lacking the required nominations of MPs*”
I wonder who insisted on the addition of “despite lacking the required………” to the end of the sentence and also the use of that “required” which I thought was what the court case was all about? There doesn’t seem to be any let-up to the anti-Corbyn bias at the BBC.
P.S. The asterisks in the quotes were added by me.
The prospect of Dianne Abbot being put in charge of the National Health Service might scotch Jezzer’s efforts somewhat. Or the prospect of Dianne Abbot being put in charge of anything really. Needs must when the devil drives I suppose.
I’ll offer you a worse prospect: Jeremy Hunt in charge of the NHS.
Scylla and Charybdis.
Your opinion is your business.
This is kind of related, so I thought I’d add it, and you can make of it what you like, but I’ve just been looking on my updates on twitter etc, and he’s in Leeds tonight apparently, but some of the crowds he’s been getting are quite staggering!
Corbyn spoke with a lot of confidence & charisma during the recent UNITE Policy Conference(held more than a week ago). If he had spoken like that during the PMQs(against Cameron), I’ll have no problems voting for Corbyn again. Why didn’t Corbyn speak with confidence & charisma during PMQs? The PMQs session is the
pinnacle of British democratic process.
No it isn’t; it’s a Punch-and-Judy show with no relevance at all.
Still, Corbyn does acquit himself very well. Do you watch PM As live, or only absorb the mass media coverage of it? There’s a big difference!
“The PMQs session is the pinnacle of British democratic process”. That’s an excellent line, and one that made me laugh. I don’t know how you managed to think up of that one, but thank you for making me laugh!
If PMQs wasn’t televised, I’d say dump it…. That’s the way to do it! :)
To: [email protected]
8 March 2016 – PMQs
Sir,
I have written to you recently, and previously, about my utter disgust at the appalling scenes I constantly witness during Prime Minster’s Questions.
From my point of view, I find that the Conservative benches are the main instigators of the incessant barracking of the benches opposite.
And, I have to say, I find your allowing of, at times, the most prolonged deafening and unseemly diatribe, from those who are supposed to be sober and responsible executives of the running of our country.
You appear to quite enjoy it at times, and often take an unconscionable amount of time to call the rabble to order.
This weekly farce sickens me, and anyone wishing to become involved in politics will be hard pressed to have any respect for these so-called “Honourable” and “Right Honourable” persons.
I really do think it is time for you to call a halt to this weekly pantomime, and if they cannot bring themselves to respect their position, they should at least respect the electorate whom they are supposed to represent.
Yours sincerely
J Casale
Dianne Abbot is supposed to be well-educated; she went to Cambridge!