Defeated general election candidate Julie Edge says she had ‘nowhere else to go’ but to challenge the Onchan election result in court.

Ms Edge has petitioned the High Court to declare the September 24 poll void, alleging the constituency's vote count did not comply with election law.

She claims 79 ballot papers were unaccounted for, candidates had insufficient opportunity to request a recount and postal votes were opened without notice.

At a hearing on Thursday, the court agreed that a supervised recount should take place as soon as possible, potentially within seven to ten days, at the Courts of Justice.

The recount will be conducted by Onchan deputy returning officer Jeremy Callin under the chief registrar's supervision, with Ms Edge and her counting agent present.

The other candidates who contested Onchan will also be invited to attend the recount, which is expected to take place in a courtroom.

Deemster Andrew Corlett described the petition as ‘unprecedented’ and said a supervised recount was the ‘most pragmatic and sensible way to proceed’.

Speaking outside court after Thursday’s hearing, Ms Edge said she was pleased with the arrangements agreed for the supervised recount.

She said: ‘The integrity of the election process and democracy is fundamental.

‘It’s an unprecedented situation. Unfortunately I had nowhere else to go – this was the only option.’

The former education minister, first elected in Onchan in 2016, failed to secure a third term in the September 24 general election.

She received 866 votes, finishing third behind Rob Callister, who secured 1,103, and first-time candidate Rachel Glover, who topped the poll with 1,245 votes and has since been appointed DEFA Minister.

Ms Edge acknowledges in her petition that the 79 unaccounted ballot papers would not change the result, but argues the discrepancy raises questions about the integrity of the count.

The recount is expected to take place in one of the larger courtrooms, possibly outside normal hours.

Deemster Corlett said the court was ‘extremely busy during the day’.

Kathryn Clough, representing Mr Callin, said the government auditor could undertake the recount, but warned that this could take some time.

She instead proposed a full, supervised, vote-by-vote recount conducted by Mr Callin in front of Ms Edge and observers.

The media will be allowed to attend the court-supervised recount, despite an initial objection from the deputy returning officer’s representative.

Ms Clough had argued that the press should be excluded because the recount would be conducted under strict conditions and a ‘degree of privacy’ was desirable.

Ms Edge disagreed, telling the court: ‘I certainly would not have any issue with the press being present.’

Deemster Corlett said he saw no reason to exclude journalists, noting that their attendance would mirror the arrangements at a normal election count.

The court has ordered Ms Edge to lodge £500 as security for costs.

She may also request the presence of an independent deputy returning officer.

Mr Callin, as respondent, must provide a report to the court within seven days of the supervised recount.

The recount is an agreed procedural step in the petition proceedings, rather than a ruling that the original count breached election law.