Attorney General v. Bennett [2001] UKEAT 0112_01_0205 (2 May 2001)

Attorney General v. Bennett [2001] UKEAT 0112_01_0205 (2 May 2001)

Mr Bennett has habitually and persistently instituted vexatious proceedings and applications without reasonable grounds, justifying the exercise of discretion to make a restriction of proceedings order under section 33 of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996, with no limitation as to duration.

Citation
[2001] UKEAT 0112_01_0205
Parties
Applicant: HM Attorney General; Respondent: Mr Stephen Bernard Bennett
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
02 May 2001
Procedural Posture
Application for Restriction of Proceedings Order / Final Judgment
Outcome
restriction of proceedings order granted
Legal Topics
Vexatious Litigation, Restriction of Proceedings, Employment Tribunal Procedure

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

HM Attorney General

Applicant

Mr Stephen Bernard Bennett

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Restriction of Proceedings Order / Final Judgment

  1. 1 Whether Mr Bennett has habitually and persistently instituted vexatious proceedings without reasonable grounds
  2. 2 Whether a restriction of proceedings order should be made and its duration

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Bennett has habitually and persistently instituted vexatious proceedings and applications without reasonable grounds, justifying the exercise of discretion to make a restriction of proceedings order under section 33 of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996, with no limitation as to duration.

Court Disposition

restriction of proceedings order granted

Orders

  • Restriction of proceedings order made against Mr Bennett under section 33 of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996, to remain in force indefinitely.