Nursing and Midwifery Council v AM Harrold

Nursing and Midwifery Council v AM Harrold

The Defendant has persistently issued claims and applications against the Claimants which are totally without merit, including repeated attempts to re-litigate issues already decided, claims brought long after time limits, and applications bound to fail. The High Court has jurisdiction to grant a GCRO restraining further proceedings in the ET, county court, and High Court. The conduct of the Claimants does not prevent the grant of a CRO. A GCRO is proportionate and necessary to protect the Claimants and the courts from further vexatious litigation.

Parties
Claimant: Nursing and Midwifery Council; Claimant: North Bristol NHS Trust; Defendant: Mrs A M Harrold
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 May 2016
Procedural Posture
Part 8 Claim for General Civil Restraint Order / Judgment on Application for GCRO
Outcome
General Civil Restraint Order granted against Defendant for two years
Legal Topics
Civil Restraint Orders, Vexatious Litigation, Discrimination, Victimisation, Jurisdiction, Judicial Review
Civil Procedure Employment Law Equality Law Civil Restraint Orders Vexatious Litigation Discrimination Victimisation Jurisdiction +1 more

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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nursing and Midwifery Council

Claimant

North Bristol NHS Trust

Claimant

Mrs A M Harrold

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Part 8 Claim for General Civil Restraint Order / Judgment on Application for GCRO

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defendant has persistently issued claims or made applications which are totally without merit (TWM)
  2. 2 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to grant a GCRO restraining proceedings in the Employment Tribunal
  3. 3 Whether the conduct of the Claimants prevents the grant of a CRO

Ratio Decidendi

The Defendant has persistently issued claims and applications against the Claimants which are totally without merit, including repeated attempts to re-litigate issues already decided, claims brought long after time limits, and applications bound to fail. The High Court has jurisdiction to grant a GCRO restraining further proceedings in the ET, county court, and High Court. The conduct of the Claimants does not prevent the grant of a CRO. A GCRO is proportionate and necessary to protect the Claimants and the courts from further vexatious litigation.

Court Disposition

General Civil Restraint Order granted against Defendant for two years

Orders

  • Defendant restrained from bringing claims against Claimants in the county court, Employment Tribunal, and High Court without permission of the applications judge of the Queen's Bench Division
  • Fourteenth and fifteenth ET claims included in the GCRO