header-logo header-logo

26 September 2014 / Stephen Gold
Issue: 7623 / Categories: Features , Civil way , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Civil Way: 26 September 2014

Harassment in Court & Ouch! 

Harassment in Court

Restraint and vexatious litigant orders have their place but they fail to compensate the hapless litigant in a pecuniary way for the agony of being dragged to more civil court venues than is healthy for the organs. Fox v Hall [2014] EWHC 2747 (QB), [2014] All ER (D) 78 (Aug) (in which, incidentally, the claimant came a cropper) reminds that, as a matter of law, it is possible for litigation to constitute harassment. In Allen v Southwark London Borough Council[2008] EWCA Civ 1478, [2008] All ER (D) 113 (Nov) the Court of Appeal held that a number of wrongly issued possession proceedings could amount to harassment. And in Baron v CPS(13 June 2000, unreported) Morrison J said that if civil proceedings were being used for an ulterior purpose, namely to air legitimate grievances but to cause distress to those involved in the process, then the line may be crossed and the acts may become unlawful under the Protection from Harassment Act

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll