header-logo header-logo

29 November 2013
Issue: 7586 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Vexatious proceedings

Douglas v Ministry of Justice [2013] EWHC 3640 (QB), [2013] All ER (D) 253 (Nov)

A litigant who made claims or applications, which had absolutely no merit, harmed the administration of justice by wasting the limited time and resources of the courts. Such claims and applications consumed public funds and diverted the courts from dealing with cases which had real merit. Litigants who repeatedly made hopeless claims or applications imposed costs on others for no good purpose and usually at little or no cost to themselves. Typically such litigants had time on their hands and no means of paying any costs of litigation, so they were entitled to remission of court fees and the prospect of an order for costs against them would be no deterrent. In those circumstances, there was a strong public interest in protecting the court system from abuse by imposing an additional restraint on their use of the courts’ resources. 

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll