false declarations of numbers by a returning officer, or by other such acts or mishaps. We think that the same result should follow if, by reason of any such or similar mishaps the tribunal, without being able to say that a majority had been prevented, should be satisfied that there was reasonable ground to believe that a majority of the electors may have been prevented from electing the candidate they preferred. But if the tribunal should only be satisfied that certain of such mishaps had occurred, but should not be satisfied either that a majority had been, or that there was reason to believe that a majority might have been prevented from electing the candidate they preferred, then we think that the existence of such mishaps would entitle the tribunal to declare the election void by the common law of Parliament" Woodward v. Sarsons (ante) did not meet the approval of Lord Denning in - Morgan and others u. Simpson and another [I9747 3 All ER 722. Lord Denning commenting on Woodward and Sarsons said at page 727 "But, if the errors had affected the result (in other words, if Woodward would have won but for the mistakes of the polling officers), the court, as I read the judgment, would have declared the election void. Whilst I agree with the passage which I have quoted, there are other passages with which I do not agree. Some of them are erroneous, as Stephenson L.J. will point out Others are not sense as Lawton L.J. will observe. In future the case should be regarded as authority only for what is decided, and not by what is said." Continuing Lord Denning said: "Collating all these cases together I suggest the law can be stated in these propositions: (1) I€the election was conducted so badly that it was not substantially in accordance with the law as to elections, the election is vitiated, irrespective of whether the result was affected or not That is shown by the Hackney case where two out of 19 polling stations were closed all day and 5,000