Kerry v Y (Rev 1) [2019] EWHC 3228 (QB) (14 November 2019)

Kerry v Y (Rev 1) [2019] EWHC 3228 (QB) (14 November 2019)

The ECRO and GCRO were lawfully and proportionately imposed to prevent abuse of process by the claimant, who has a history of making totally without merit applications. The ECRO applies to applications in existing proceedings, including applications for permission to appeal. There is no breach of Article 6 ECHR or deprivation of protection from harassment, as the claimant can still seek permission for genuine claims. The GCRO was justified given the claimant's persistent conduct and the inadequacy of the ECRO alone.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 3228 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Ian Michael Kerry; Defendant: Y; Defendant: X; Defendant: Chief Constable of Humbershire Police
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Appeal and Applications to Set Aside/vary Civil Restraint Orders / High Court Judgment on Appeal and Applications
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; applications to set aside or vary orders refused
Legal Topics
Civil Restraint Orders, Harassment, Judicial Review, Abuse of Process, Article 6 ECHR
Civil Procedure Civil Restraint Orders Harassment Judicial Review Abuse of Process Article 6 ECHR

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ian Michael Kerry

Claimant

Y

Defendant

X

Defendant

Chief Constable of Humbershire Police

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal and Applications to Set Aside/vary Civil Restraint Orders / High Court Judgment on Appeal and Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the extended civil restraint order (ECRO) applied to applications for permission to appeal in pre-existing actions
  2. 2 Whether the ECRO and general civil restraint order (GCRO) were lawfully and proportionately imposed
  3. 3 Whether the ECRO or GCRO breached Article 6 ECHR rights or deprived the claimant of protection from harassment

Ratio Decidendi

The ECRO and GCRO were lawfully and proportionately imposed to prevent abuse of process by the claimant, who has a history of making totally without merit applications. The ECRO applies to applications in existing proceedings, including applications for permission to appeal. There is no breach of Article 6 ECHR or deprivation of protection from harassment, as the claimant can still seek permission for genuine claims. The GCRO was justified given the claimant's persistent conduct and the inadequacy of the ECRO alone.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; applications to set aside or vary orders refused

Orders

  • Appeal against order of HHJ Richardson of 4 February 2019 dismissed
  • Application to set aside or vary Lavender J’s order of 4 September 2019 refused