Ashcroft & Anor v Webster [2017] EWHC 887 (Ch) (21 April 2017)

Ashcroft & Anor v Webster [2017] EWHC 887 (Ch) (21 April 2017)

The Defendant's conduct since the imposition of the ECRO, viewed in light of prior persistent vexatious litigation, demonstrates a clear and serious ongoing risk of further vexatious claims. The court finds it appropriate to extend the ECRO for two years to protect the Claimants, third parties, and the administration of justice.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 887 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Alison Virginia Ashcroft; Claimant: John Francis Penley; Defendant: Rupert Jolyon St John Webster
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 April 2017
Procedural Posture
Application to Extend Extended Civil Restraint Order / Post Judgment, Application Hearing
Outcome
Application granted
Legal Topics
Civil Restraint Orders, Vexatious Litigation, Proprietary Estoppel, Trusts, Costs Orders

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alison Virginia Ashcroft

Claimant

John Francis Penley

Claimant

Rupert Jolyon St John Webster

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application to Extend Extended Civil Restraint Order / Post Judgment, Application Hearing

  1. 1 Whether it is appropriate to extend the duration of an extended civil restraint order against the Defendant
  2. 2 Whether the Defendant's conduct demonstrates a risk of persistent vexatious litigation

Ratio Decidendi

The Defendant's conduct since the imposition of the ECRO, viewed in light of prior persistent vexatious litigation, demonstrates a clear and serious ongoing risk of further vexatious claims. The court finds it appropriate to extend the ECRO for two years to protect the Claimants, third parties, and the administration of justice.

Court Disposition

Application granted

Orders

  • Extended civil restraint order against the Defendant to expire on 22 March 2019, limited to the High Court and County Court