Losing candidate's legal challenge over Runcorn by-election result to go ahead
Graham Moore lodged a parliamentary election petition at the High Court in May
Last updated 11th Sep 2025
A legal challenge against the result of the Runcorn and Helsby by-election earlier this year can go ahead, the High Court has ruled.
Graham Moore stood for the English Constitution Party at the by-election on May 1, and finished last of 15 candidates with 50 votes.
The by-election was won by Reform candidate Sarah Pochin, who won by six votes following a recount.
Mr Moore lodged a parliamentary election petition at the High Court on May 15, requesting that the election be declared void and that an independent recount be conducted.
At a hearing in July, barristers for Royal Mail, Cheshire Police, the returning officer Stephen Young, and Ms Pochin all asked two judges to dismiss the petition.
In a ruling on Thursday, Mr Justice Butcher and Mrs Justice Yip dismissed the case against Royal Mail and Cheshire Police, but ruled that the "trial of the petition" should go ahead.
The judges said the trial "should take place not before October 2 2025 in the parliamentary constituency of Runcorn and Helsby before an election court comprising two judges".
Ms Pochin overturned a majority of almost 14,700 to take the seat from Labour.
The by-election was triggered when former Labour MP Mike Amesbury quit after admitting to punching a constituent.
An election petition is the only way to challenge the result of a Parliamentary election, with Mr Justice Butcher and Mrs Justice Yip stating that the High Court had "no residual power or discretion to override" the scheme devised by Parliament.
The Government website states that anyone can challenge a Parliamentary election if they had the right to vote in it, or were a candidate.
Those filing petitions must usually do so within 21 days and must pay around £650, and can do so if they feel it was run improperly, such as by votes being counted incorrectly or a candidate breaking the law.
The candidate who won the election must be served with the petition, even if the petitioner does not believe they have done anything wrong.
In their judgment, the judges said that Mr Moore made complaints against Royal Mail over the "alleged non-delivery of election communication leaflets", and had accused the police of "harassment and failure to investigate election interference".
No details were given in the ruling as to Mr Moore's claims against Ms Pochin or Mr Young.
The judges found that it would be "improper" for both Royal Mail and Cheshire Police to be involved in the case as they "are not entitled to be respondents to the petition and accordingly have no standing on the wider issues".
Barristers for Ms Pochin said that the election petition should be dismissed as it had not been "validly served upon her", which meant it was "procedurally defective".
Lawyers for Mr Young also said the petition should be thrown out due to the petition being incorrectly filled in, which they claimed was a "procedural irregularity".
The judges continued that Mr Moore, who represented himself, claimed that he had a "fundamental right to contest the integrity of the election", and that "relying upon procedural technicalities over substantive rights undermines the bedrock of English law".
In a 26-page ruling, they said that the legal challenge should continue despite the errors, noting that Mr Moore had "acted promptly" to file the petition.