Attorney General v Douglas [2006] EWCA Civ 1560 (01 November 2006)
The Divisional Court had no realistic alternative but to make the section 42 order given the appellant's history of prolific and vexatious litigation, and the order appropriately balances protection of the courts with the appellant's ability to bring justified proceedings with judicial leave.
- Citation
- [2006] EWCA Civ 1560
- Parties
- Claimant/respondent: Her Majesty's Attorney General; Defendant/appellant: Paula Douglas
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 01 November 2006
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Permission to Appeal / Court of Appeal, Post Divisional Court Order
- Outcome
- application refused
- Legal Topics
- Vexatious Litigant Orders, Section 42 Supreme Court Act 1981, Access to Justice, Impact on Legal Career, Human Rights
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Her Majesty's Attorney General
Claimant/respondent
Paula Douglas
Defendant/appellant
Procedural Posture
Application for Permission to Appeal / Court of Appeal, Post Divisional Court Order
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Divisional Court erred in making a section 42 order against the appellant
- 2 Whether the order improperly interfered with the appellant's legal career and rights under EU and human rights law
Ratio Decidendi
The Divisional Court had no realistic alternative but to make the section 42 order given the appellant's history of prolific and vexatious litigation, and the order appropriately balances protection of the courts with the appellant's ability to bring justified proceedings with judicial leave.
Court Disposition
application refused
Orders
- permission to appeal refused
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment