My quote was from page 8 of the electoral commission document.
It’s effectively repeated in the Burden and Standard of proof section of the court decision you link to.
In the court case, the margin of victory was 120 votes, doubt was cast upon 229 postal votes which is more than enough to have overturned the result. Therefore the election was declared void.
Whereas all three main parties broke the law on election spending in the 2015 General Election, should we have rerun that as well?
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-fined-20000-for-undeclared-election-spending
You claimed earlier that if the result was binding then it would have been invalidated. My contention is that the rules of a binding election require a standard of proof that there has been tampering such that it renders the result unsafe.
This far there is no evidence of successful interference in the referendum result. Therefore no reason to believe it would have been invalidated.