Attorney General v Ratra

Attorney General v Ratra

The court exercised its discretion to make a civil proceedings order under Section 42 of the Supreme Court Act 1981, finding it appropriate and justified on objective grounds, and rejected the alternative of requiring a litigation friend as insufficient to prevent further vexatious litigation.

Parties
Claimant: Her Majesty's Attorney General; Defendant: Ratra
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 May 2003
Procedural Posture
Application / Judgment
Outcome
civil proceedings order made under Section 42 without limit of time
Legal Topics
Vexatious Litigant, Mental Health, Court Discretion

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty's Attorney General

Claimant

Ratra

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to make a vexatious litigant order under Section 42 of the Supreme Court Act 1981
  2. 2 Whether an alternative route, such as requiring a litigation friend under part 21(3), is appropriate given the defendant's mental condition

Ratio Decidendi

The court exercised its discretion to make a civil proceedings order under Section 42 of the Supreme Court Act 1981, finding it appropriate and justified on objective grounds, and rejected the alternative of requiring a litigation friend as insufficient to prevent further vexatious litigation.

Court Disposition

civil proceedings order made under Section 42 without limit of time

Orders

  • Mr Ratra declared a vexatious litigant under Section 42 of the Supreme Court Act 1981
  • Order to remain in force indefinitely