S.L. v M.L. (Approved) [2020] IEHC 203 (13 February 2020)

S.L. v M.L. (Approved) [2020] IEHC 203 (13 February 2020)

There was insufficient evidence to demonstrate habitual, vexatious, or unreasonable litigation by the Respondent to justify the making of an Isaac Wunder Order, and such an order would not be proportionate in this case.

Citation
[2020] IEHC 203
Parties
Applicant: S. L.; Respondent: M. L.
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
13 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Application for Isaac Wunder Order
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
Isaac Wunder Order, Vexatious Litigation, Access to Justice
Family Law Civil Procedure Isaac Wunder Order Vexatious Litigation Access to Justice

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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

S. L.

Applicant

M. L.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Application for Isaac Wunder Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether sufficient evidence exists to justify an Isaac Wunder Order restricting court access
  2. 2 Whether previous litigation by the Respondent was habitual, vexatious, or unreasonable

Ratio Decidendi

There was insufficient evidence to demonstrate habitual, vexatious, or unreasonable litigation by the Respondent to justify the making of an Isaac Wunder Order, and such an order would not be proportionate in this case.

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • No Isaac Wunder Order granted
  • No order as to costs