Rahman's official election agent Alibor Choudhury was ordered to vacate his own office of councillor in the ward of Stepney Green for being guilty of corrupt and illegal practices.

[iv] Alternatively, anyone convicted in a criminal court of a corrupt or illegal electoral practice is required to vacate their elected office.

[xxiii] Throughout the case, it was the petitioners submission that Tower Hamlets First was in reality a "one-man band" for the sole purpose of the continuation of Lutfur Rahman as mayor, rather than a genuine political party.

While no specific allegation of false registration was particularised on the election petition,[3] evidence was heard by the court as part of the case on personation and other voting offences.

[xxvi] Particular examples of false registration highlighted in the judgment include that of former councillor Kabir Ahmed, councillor Shahed Ali, Moniruzzaman Syed, and Aktaruz Zaman, all of whom were candidates representing Tower Hamlets First at the 2014 Tower Hamlets council election in the wards of Weavers,[10] Whitechapel,[11] Bromley North,[12] and both St Peter's[13] and Blackwall & Cubitt Town respectively.

[xxx] While none of the evidence in isolation would be enough for a finding of corrupt practices, it was Richard Mawrey's view that taken together the criminal standard for postal vote offences under section 62A was met.

Richard Mawrey concluded that this was not sufficient a pattern to reach the criminal standard of proof for the alleged offence of tampering with ballot papers.

[xxxii] The election court also ruled against Rahman on the grounds of "undue spiritual influence", referring to a letter in his support signed by 101 imams.

[xxxiii] On the allegation that voters were misled by being told that Lutfur Rahman was the Labour Party candidate, the court decided that the evidence presented "was much too flimsy".

[xxxiv] Lutfur Rahman was found personally guilty by the court of making false statements about a candidate, bribery, and undue spiritual influence.

[xxxv] Alibor Choudhury was found personally guilty of bribery, making false statements about a candidate, and payment of canvassers.

[xxxvi] As a consequence of the findings, the 2014 mayoral election was deemed void, and Alibor Choudhury was required to vacate his office of councillor with immediate effect.

Both Rahman and Choudhury were barred from holding elective office, voting or being registered as a voter for five years as bribery and undue influence constitute corrupt practices.

[16][17] As such, a copy of the judgment was brought to the attention of the Solicitors Regulation Authority for potential misconduct proceedings against Rahman as required by section 162 of the 1983 Act.

[26] Of the remaining 16, 7 eventually left the group, 4 of whom sat together under the banner People's Alliance of Tower Hamlets with Shafi Ahmed who replaced Ali as councillor, with the rest as independents.

[27] At a rally in support of Rahman, Peter Herbert, a part-time judge and Chair of the Society of Black Lawyers, criticised the Commissioner's judgment.

[30] Following his judgment, Richard Mawrey ordered Lutfur Rahman to pay the petitioners' costs to be assessed on the standard basis if not agreed between the parties.

[34][35] Rahman was also ordered to pay the costs of John Williams, the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Metropolitan Police, and expenses incurred in the hosting of the election court.

Additionally, an interim charging order was then secured against a property registered solely in Farid's name on the argument that Rahman has a beneficial interest in it.

[xliii] Knowles J granted Erlam an interim freezing and disclosure order on 29 June 2015, which was extended by Edis J to cover assets worldwide.

[xliii] On 29 January 2016, chief master Matthew Marsh ruled against Ayesha Farid granting a declaration that Lutfur Rahman holds an absolute beneficial interest in the property under question.

[xlvii] In his ruling, Marsh accused Lutfur Rahman, who was not called as a witness by Ayesha Farid[xlviii] of knowingly providing misleading information when making his mortgage application, and failure to declare rental income received to HM Revenue and Customs.

[41] Farid was labelled by Marsh as "a thoroughly unsatisfactory and unreliable witness" with a "cavalier attitude to disclosure"[42] who was "willing to alter and extend her case when challenged".

[lii] An application for permission to bring a judicial review was made by Lutfur Rahman in July 2015, with a hearing held on 26 January 2016.

[liii][46] While maintaining that many of the election court findings were wrong, the application acknowledged that challenges may only be made on those conclusions which amount to error of law.

[lv] The divisional court of Lloyd LJ and Supperstone J granted Rahman permission to bring a judicial review on the undue spiritual influence finding because the law had not been tested for over a century, but rejected the other two challenges, as a result leaving in place Rahman's five year ban from elective office even if he were to be successful in a judicial review.

[17][49] The hearing into the charges was scheduled to take place between 7–10 March 2017 but was adjourned pending the determination of Rahman's second application for permission to bring a judicial review of the election court decision.

[50][51] The rearranged hearing started on Monday 18 December 2017 after the tribunal panel rejected an application for adjournment by Rahman filed the previous Friday on the grounds that he could not finance a representative nor feel able to self-represent given his inexperience in disciplinary matters.

"[56] From the end of 2016, Lutfur Rahman and his associates, including his former deputy Ohid Ahmad, attempted to form a new political party named Tower Hamlets Together.