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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll