Attorney General v Vaidya [2017] EWHC 2152 (Admin) (20 July 2017)

Attorney General v Vaidya [2017] EWHC 2152 (Admin) (20 July 2017)

Dr Vaidya has habitually and persistently and without reasonable grounds instituted vexatious civil proceedings and made vexatious applications, including in the Employment Tribunal, justifying the making of a Section 42 order restraining him from instituting proceedings or acting as a representative or McKenzie Friend without leave of the court.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 2152 (Admin)
Parties
Appellant: HM Attorney General; Respondent: Vaidya
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 July 2017
Procedural Posture
Application for Civil Proceedings Order Under Section 42 of the Senior Courts Act 1981 / Judgment After Oral Hearing
Outcome
Section 42 order granted against Dr Vaidya.
Legal Topics
Vexatious Litigation, Civil Restraint Orders, Section 42 Senior Courts Act 1981, Mc Kenzie Friend Restrictions, Employment Tribunal Jurisdiction
Civil Procedure Administrative Law Vexatious Litigation Civil Restraint Orders Section 42 Senior Courts Act 1981 Mc Kenzie Friend Restrictions Employment Tribunal Jurisdiction

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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

HM Attorney General

Appellant

Vaidya

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Civil Proceedings Order Under Section 42 of the Senior Courts Act 1981 / Judgment After Oral Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Dr Vaidya has habitually and persistently and without reasonable ground instituted vexatious civil proceedings or made vexatious applications under Section 42 of the Senior Courts Act 1981
  2. 2 Whether a Section 42 order should extend to prohibiting Dr Vaidya from acting as a representative or McKenzie Friend

Ratio Decidendi

Dr Vaidya has habitually and persistently and without reasonable grounds instituted vexatious civil proceedings and made vexatious applications, including in the Employment Tribunal, justifying the making of a Section 42 order restraining him from instituting proceedings or acting as a representative or McKenzie Friend without leave of the court.

Court Disposition

Section 42 order granted against Dr Vaidya.

Orders

  • Dr Vaidya is restrained from instituting or making applications in civil courts and tribunals, including the Employment Tribunal and Employment Appeal Tribunal, without leave of the court.
  • Dr Vaidya is prohibited from acting as a representative or McKenzie Friend in any court or tribunal without leave of the court.