Electoral Law Act (Northern Ireland) 1962

Supplementary provisions on transfer N.I.

50 (1) If, at any stage of the count, two or more candidates have surpluses, the transferable papers of the candidate with the largest surplus shall be transferred first, and if—

(a) the surpluses determined in respect of two or more candidates are equal, the transferable papers of the candidate who had the highest recorded votes at the earliest preceding stage at which they had unequal votes, shall be transferred first, and

(b) the votes credited to two or more candidates were equal at all stages of the count, the returning officer shall decide between those candidates by lot and the transferable papers of the candidate on whom the lot falls shall be transferred first.

(2) The returning officer shall, on each transfer of transferable papers under rule 49—

(a) record the total transfer value of the votes transferred to each candidate;

(b) add that value to the previous total of votes recorded for each candidate and record the new total;

(c) record as non-transferable votes the difference between the surplus and the total transfer value of transferred votes and add that difference to the previously recorded total of non-transferable votes, and

(d) compare—

(i) the total number of votes then recorded for all of the candidates, together with total number of non-transferable votes, with

(ii) the recorded total of valid first preference votes.

(3) All ballot papers transferred under rule 49 or 51 shall be clearly marked, either individually or as a sub-parcel, so as to indicate the transfer value recorded at that time to each vote on that paper or, as the case may be, all the papers in that sub-parcel.

(4) Where a ballot paper is so marked that it is unclear to the returning officer at any stage of the count under rule 49 or 51 for which candidate the next preference is recorded, the returning officer shall treat any vote on that ballot paper as a non-transferable vote; and votes on a ballot paper shall be so treated where, for example, the names of two or more candidates (whether continuing candidates or not) are so marked that, in the opinion of the returning officer, the same order of preference is indicated or the numerical sequence is broken.