Nursing & Midwifery Council & Anor v Harrold [2015] EWHC 2254 (QB) (31 July 2015)

Nursing & Midwifery Council & Anor v Harrold [2015] EWHC 2254 (QB) (31 July 2015)

The High Court has inherent jurisdiction to make a Civil Restraint Order covering proceedings before the Employment Tribunal, as part of its power to prevent abuse of process and protect inferior courts and tribunals, and this jurisdiction is not excluded by the CPR or statutory provisions.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 2254
Parties
Claimant: Nursing & Midwifery Council; Claimant: the Trust; Defendant: Mrs Harrold
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 July 2015
Procedural Posture
Part 8 Claim for Civil Restraint Order / Jurisdictional Ruling on Power to Grant CRO Covering Employment Tribunal Proceedings
Outcome
Jurisdiction affirmed; High Court has power to grant CRO covering ET proceedings. Appropriateness of order in this case to be determined on facts.
Legal Topics
Civil Restraint Orders, Inherent Jurisdiction, Supervisory Jurisdiction, Vexatious Litigation, Employment Tribunal Procedure

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 3 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nursing & Midwifery Council

Claimant

the Trust

Claimant

Mrs Harrold

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Part 8 Claim for Civil Restraint Order / Jurisdictional Ruling on Power to Grant CRO Covering Employment Tribunal Proceedings

  1. 1 Does the High Court have inherent jurisdiction to make a Civil Restraint Order (CRO) covering proceedings before the Employment Tribunal (ET)?
  2. 2 Should the High Court exercise such jurisdiction in this case?

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court has inherent jurisdiction to make a Civil Restraint Order covering proceedings before the Employment Tribunal, as part of its power to prevent abuse of process and protect inferior courts and tribunals, and this jurisdiction is not excluded by the CPR or statutory provisions.

Court Disposition

Jurisdiction affirmed; High Court has power to grant CRO covering ET proceedings. Appropriateness of order in this case to be determined on facts.