Attorney General v Bentley (Practice and Procedure : Restriction of proceedings order) [2012] UKEAT 0556_11_0305 (03 May 2012)

Attorney General v Bentley (Practice and Procedure : Restriction of proceedings order) [2012] UKEAT 0556_11_0305 (03 May 2012)

Anthony Bentley habitually and persistently instituted vexatious and hopeless claims in Employment Tribunals without reasonable ground, causing inconvenience and expense to numerous respondents, and failed to heed repeated warnings and costs orders; therefore, an indefinite restriction of proceedings order under section 33 of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996 is necessary to protect the tribunal system and potential respondents from further abuse.

Citation
[2012] UKEAT 0556_11_0305
Parties
Applicant: Attorney General; Respondent: Anthony Bentley
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
03 May 2012
Procedural Posture
Restriction of Proceedings Order/vexatious Litigant / Final Judgment on Application for Restriction of Proceedings Order
Outcome
Restriction of proceedings order granted against Anthony Bentley for an indefinite period.
Legal Topics
Vexatious Litigant, Restriction of Proceedings Order, Employment Tribunals Act 1996, Abuse of Process
Employment Law Civil Procedure Vexatious Litigant Restriction of Proceedings Order Employment Tribunals Act 1996 Abuse of Process

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Attorney General

Applicant

Anthony Bentley

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Restriction of Proceedings Order/vexatious Litigant / Final Judgment on Application for Restriction of Proceedings Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Anthony Bentley has habitually and persistently instituted vexatious proceedings without reasonable ground under section 33 of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether a restriction of proceedings order should be made against Anthony Bentley and if so, for what duration

Ratio Decidendi

Anthony Bentley habitually and persistently instituted vexatious and hopeless claims in Employment Tribunals without reasonable ground, causing inconvenience and expense to numerous respondents, and failed to heed repeated warnings and costs orders; therefore, an indefinite restriction of proceedings order under section 33 of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996 is necessary to protect the tribunal system and potential respondents from further abuse.

Court Disposition

Restriction of proceedings order granted against Anthony Bentley for an indefinite period.

Orders

  • No proceedings shall be instituted in any Employment Tribunal or before the Employment Appeal Tribunal by Anthony Bentley without the permission of the Employment Appeal Tribunal.
  • Any proceedings instituted by Anthony Bentley before the making of this order shall not be continued by him without the permission of the Employment Appeal Tribunal.