header-logo header-logo

Vexatious proceedings

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

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

FOIL—Bridget Tatham

FOIL—Bridget Tatham

Forum of Insurance Lawyers elects president for 2026

Gibson Dunn—Robbie Sinclair

Gibson Dunn—Robbie Sinclair

Partner joinslabour and employment practice in London

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

NEWS
Cryptocurrency is reshaping financial remedy cases, warns Robert Webster of Maguire Family Law in NLJ this week. Digital assets—concealable, volatile and hard to trace—are fuelling suspicions of hidden wealth, yet Form E still lacks a section for crypto-disclosure
NLJ columnist Stephen Gold surveys a flurry of procedural reforms in his latest 'Civil way' column
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
back-to-top-scroll