Cost of Alistair Carmichael MP legal action triples

A group which has taken legal action against Orkney and Shetland MP Alistair Carmichael has said the cost of the case has more than tripled.

Four constituents raised the action against the Lib Dem under the Representation of the People Act 1983.

They claim Mr Carmichael misled voters over a memo which was leaked before May's election.

Crowdfunding raised - and passed - the initial target of £60,000, but a new target has been set at £208,000.

Earlier in the year, the election court in Edinburgh heard evidence from six witnesses over three days, in what was believed to be the first case of its kind in Scotland for 50 years.

Memo contents

The two judges, Lady Paton and Lord Matthews, will present their judgement to the House of Commons at a later date.

The contents of the memo, published in the Daily Telegraph at the start of the election campaign in April, claimed that SNP leader and Scottish first minister, Nicola Sturgeon, would secretly prefer Tory leader David Cameron as prime minister rather than his Labour opponent Ed Miliband.

The case centres around a Daily Telegraph article

At the time of the leak, Mr Carmichael claimed in a TV interview the first he had heard of it was when he received a phone call from a reporter.

The newspaper said the first minister's comments, reportedly made to the French ambassador, undermined claims that she wanted to build a "progressive alliance" with other left-wing parties.

Mr Carmichael - who was Scottish secretary in the Tory-Lib Dem coalition before the election and is now his party's only MP in Scotland - authorised the leaking of a civil service memo by his special adviser.

Both the ambassador and the first minister later denied the accuracy of the civil service memo.

The court heard how a Cabinet Office inquiry into the leak was launched shortly after the newspaper article was printed on 3 April.

Mr Carmichael told the court he was initially "less than fully truthful" with the inquiry.

Mr Carmichael's lawyers argue his actions were political and did not affect his re-election.