Farid el Diwany v Solicitors Regulation Authority

Farid el Diwany v Solicitors Regulation Authority

The applications to re-open previous appeals do not meet the high threshold of CPR Part 52.30. There is no evidence of actual or apparent bias by any judge. The criticisms of the judges are wholly unjustified, and the previous decisions were correct. Mr El Diwany's persistent meritless litigation warrants the imposition of a General Civil Restraint Order for three years.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: Farid El Diwany; Defendant/respondent: Solicitors Regulation Authority; Defendant/respondent: Roy Hansen; Defendant/respondent: Torill Sorte; Defendant/respondent: Ministry of Justice & The Police, Norway
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Applications to Re Open Appeals and Impose Civil Restraint Order
Outcome
Applications dismissed as totally without merit; General Civil Restraint Order imposed for three years.
Legal Topics
Bias and Recusal, Civil Restraint Orders, Re Opening Appeals, Defamation, Professional Misconduct
Civil Procedure Professional Discipline Defamation Bias and Recusal Civil Restraint Orders Re Opening Appeals Professional Misconduct

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Farid El Diwany

Claimant/appellant

Solicitors Regulation Authority

Defendant/respondent

Roy Hansen

Defendant/respondent

Torill Sorte

Defendant/respondent

Ministry of Justice & The Police, Norway

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Applications to Re Open Appeals and Impose Civil Restraint Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applications to re-open previous appeals should be granted under CPR Part 52.30
  2. 2 Whether there was actual or apparent bias by judges in previous proceedings
  3. 3 Whether a General Civil Restraint Order (GCRO) should be imposed against Mr El Diwany

Ratio Decidendi

The applications to re-open previous appeals do not meet the high threshold of CPR Part 52.30. There is no evidence of actual or apparent bias by any judge. The criticisms of the judges are wholly unjustified, and the previous decisions were correct. Mr El Diwany's persistent meritless litigation warrants the imposition of a General Civil Restraint Order for three years.

Court Disposition

Applications dismissed as totally without merit; General Civil Restraint Order imposed for three years.

Orders

  • All three applications by Mr El Diwany are dismissed and certified as totally without merit.
  • A General Civil Restraint Order is imposed on Mr El Diwany for three years, restraining him from issuing claims or applications in any court without permission.