Craig Mackinlay's parliamentary campaign failed to declare spending of £66,600 during the 2015 General Election campaign against Ukip leader Nigel Farage, a court heard.

The Tory MP for South Thanet failed to tell the Electoral Commission about expenses ranging from campaigner salaries to accommodation, the jury was told.

Aftab Jafferjee QC, prosecuting, said undeclared spending during the "long campaign" period totalled £14,600.

Earlier, the court was told that Mackinlay was “complicit” in submitting false expenses to the Electoral Commission after he toppled Mr Farage.

Jurors were told fixed elections are split into two periods, a “short campaign” and “long campaign”, but Mackinlay’s team submitted false expense returns for both.

Undeclared spending during the "short campaign" period amounted to £52,000, the jury heard.

Mr Jafferjee QC said the spending limit for the long campaign - which ran from December 19, 2014 until March 29, 2015 - was slightly more than £37,000.

For the short campaign, between March 30 and May 7, 2015, the limit was slightly more than £15,000.

Mackinlay’s long return showed spending of £32,661.26 and his short return was £14,833.77 - both within the limit.

But Mr Jafferjee QC said: “It’s the prosecution case that neither of those declarations as to expenditure, the long return figure and the short figure, were true.”

He added: “Each of these three defendants were complicit in advancing these false declarations and in addition, the signature purporting to be Nathan Gray’s, the election agent on the long return, was not his.

“He had effectively permitted someone to forge his signature on that return.”

Gray’s role was described to jurors as “responsible for the legal and financial side of the campaign.”

He was to be involved in “all aspects of planning for the campaign and responsible for ensuring the candidate and team act within the law.”

The jury heard he admitted some expense paperwork included his “forged” signature but claimed he did not know how it happened.

Expenses should include everything from costs linked to advertising, such as for posters, to staff wages, the jury heard.

Mr Jafferjee QC said: “These limits seek to ensure integrity and public confidence in the most obvious example of this country’s democratic process."

The trial continues.