Attorney-General v. Wheen [2000] EAT 1301_99_1804 (18 April 2000)
Mr Wheen has habitually and persistently and without reasonable ground instituted vexatious proceedings within the meaning of section 33 of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996, justifying the exercise of discretion to make a Restriction of Proceedings Order against him.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2000] EAT 1301_99_1804
- Parties
- Applicant: Attorney General; Respondent: Geoffrey Arnold Wheen
- Jurisdiction
- United Kingdom
- Judgment Date
- 18 April 2000
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Restriction of Proceedings Order / Judgment on Application
- Outcome
- Restriction of Proceedings Order made against Mr Wheen, to remain in force indefinitely.
- Legal Topics
- Vexatious Litigation, Restriction of Proceedings Order, Employment Tribunals, Discrimination Claims
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Attorney General
Applicant
Geoffrey Arnold Wheen
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Application for Restriction of Proceedings Order / Judgment on Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether Mr Wheen has habitually and persistently instituted vexatious proceedings without reasonable ground under section 33 of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996
- 2 Whether a Restriction of Proceedings Order should be made against Mr Wheen
Ratio Decidendi
Mr Wheen has habitually and persistently and without reasonable ground instituted vexatious proceedings within the meaning of section 33 of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996, justifying the exercise of discretion to make a Restriction of Proceedings Order against him.
Court Disposition
Restriction of Proceedings Order made against Mr Wheen, to remain in force indefinitely.
Orders
- Restriction of Proceedings Order under section 33 of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996 against Geoffrey Arnold Wheen, effective indefinitely.
- Application for costs by Mr Wheen against the Attorney General 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