HM Attorney-General v Boothe-Chambers [2001] EWCA Civ 2009 (19 December 2001)

HM Attorney-General v Boothe-Chambers [2001] EWCA Civ 2009 (19 December 2001)

The Divisional Court correctly applied section 42 of the Supreme Court Act 1981; no grounds for reconsideration exist as the applicant's complaints lack legal merit and do not raise any point of law.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 2009
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Her Majesty's Attorney-General; Defendant/applicant: Michael Boothe-Chambers
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 December 2001
Procedural Posture
Application for Permission to Appeal / Court of Appeal (civil Division)
Outcome
application for permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Vexatious Litigant Orders, Judicial Bias, Human Rights, Civil Proceedings Order
Civil Procedure Vexatious Litigant Orders Judicial Bias Human Rights Civil Proceedings Order

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty's Attorney-General

Claimant/respondent

Michael Boothe-Chambers

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Application for Permission to Appeal / Court of Appeal (civil Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Divisional Court erred in making a vexatious litigant order under section 42 of the Supreme Court Act 1981
  2. 2 Whether there was actual or apparent judicial bias
  3. 3 Whether the applicant was entitled to see the Bench Memorandum

Ratio Decidendi

The Divisional Court correctly applied section 42 of the Supreme Court Act 1981; no grounds for reconsideration exist as the applicant's complaints lack legal merit and do not raise any point of law.

Court Disposition

application for permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • application for permission to appeal refused