Combined Authority and Combined County Authority Returning Officer guidance for Combined Authority Mayoral elections

Grounds for determining a nomination form invalid

By law, the only grounds that you have for determining that a nomination form is invalid are:  

• that the particulars of the candidate or the persons subscribing the nomination form are not as required by law, or
• that the form is not subscribed as required
• that the person is subject to a disqualification order under section 30 of the Elections Act 2022

Particulars of the candidate

The particulars of the candidate include the description given on the nomination paper, therefore, you must hold the nomination invalid if: 

• the party does not appear on the Commission’s register of political parties as a party that can contest elections in England
• the party name or description used on the nomination form does not exactly match the party name or description as registered with the Commission
• the use of the party name or description has not been authorised by a certificate of authorisation signed by or on behalf of the party’s Nominating Officer
• the description is not registered by the Commission1  

There is case law that provides that candidates who give descriptions that are obscene, racist or an incitement to crime should be considered to have provided particulars that are “not as required by law”. This is because they contravene the law and/or will inevitably involve the Returning Officer in a breach of the law.

If the nomination form does not comply with the description rules outlined above, you must give a decision to this effect as soon as practicable after the delivery of the nomination form and, in any event, no later than 24 hours after the deadline for delivery of nomination papers.2

We have produced a nominations checklist for CARO/CCAROs which sets out what you will need to consider and specific things to look out for when determining a nomination. 

Subscribers

Our section ‘Nomination form - subscribers requirements’ contains detailed information on subscribers.

If a nomination is not subscribed as required it must be deemed invalid. 

Failure to provide a deposit

If you have not received the required £5000 deposit or any of the required nomination papers by the deadline for the submission of nomination papers, the candidate has not been validly nominated.3 There is then no need to make a formal determination, and their name should not appear on the statement of persons nominated or the ballot paper.

Return of deposit due to nomination not being valid

You must return the deposit of any candidate whose nomination you have rejected. The deposit must be returned to the person who made it and as soon as practicable after the statement of persons nominated has been published.4 For guidance on returning deposits to validly nominated candidates after an election see Post election activity.

Ground for determining a home address form invalid

You must determining that the home address form does not comply with legal requirements if:5

• it does not state the candidate’s full name
• it does not state the candidate’s home address in full
• it does not state the candidate's qualifying address or addresses if more than one of the qualifications is used

For more information about the requirements see our guidance on the home address form.

Sham nominations

You may come across a situation where the candidate's nomination is clearly a sham - for example, if a candidate has given an obviously fictitious name or address such as 'Mickey Mouse of Disney Land'. In such a case the nomination paper must be held to be invalid on the grounds that the candidate’s particulars are not as required by law.6

When considering the name, the primary consideration should be whether the “name” that has been provided on the nomination form appears to be “obviously fictitious” on the face of the paper.

If the “name” does not appear to be a genuine name and instead appears to be a statement or slogan, for example, you may consider that it is “obviously fictitious”. 

Any conclusion would be supported by considering the wider context. For example, does the name appear to be a political slogan made in response to topical political events, rather than the genuine name of a real person? 

A court would likely in those circumstances conclude that such names are “obviously fictitious” and that the nomination form should be rejected.