Section 227: Recount – Grounds – Onus of proof – Presumption—On an election

227. Recount – Grounds – Onus of proof – Presumption—On an election petition presented by the first 3 unsuccessful candidates against the return of the last 3 successful candidates at an election for the electoral district of Plaines Wilhems and Black River. HELD the petitioners upon whom the onus of proof lay had not discharged that onus to the extent of satisfying the Court that there were good grounds for believing that the returning officer had made so many mistakes in the counting of the votes that a recount would place any of the petitioners in a majority of votes over the first 2 respondents, and either of the second and third petitioners in a majority of votes over the third respondent. However, as between the third respondent and the first petitioner (the first unsuccessful candidate) the difference of only 4 votes coupled with all the circumstances of the case, notably the Court’s findings of fact in regard to the conditions under which the counting of votes was conducted, was sufficient to displace the presumption of accuracy attaching to the figures disclosed by the returning officer in respect of those 2 candidates and to give rise to a presumption that 4 mistakes may have been made in the computation of the votes polled by them. Rivalland v Chaperon (1953).