Due to the sensitive nature of some of the work undertaken by councils and public bodies, from time to time you may come across members of the public who are particularly aggrieved, difficult or fixated on one issue. Unfortunately, situations may escalate, resulting in staff members being verbally abused over the telephone, social media or email, harassed or threatened, which may require involvement form the police. In such circumstances, councils may consider it appropriate to obtain an injunction against an individual to protect their staff from harassment.
Some individuals go further and issue baseless civil court proceedings, or a series of court proceedings, against a council for a variety of unfounded reasons. In such circumstances, councils have to allocate huge resources, time and costs to defend such matters. It is, however, possible for councils to restrict the actions of litigants by obtaining a Civil Restraint Order, as set out below. Such measures can be draconian and will only be imposed in very limited circumstances.
This article considers the powers available to the courts, how effective they are and in what circumstances further action may be needed to ensure your employees are sufficiently protracted.
There is no formal definition but vexatious litigants are usually people who:
In AG v Baker (2000) it was said that: ‘The essential vice of habitual and persistent litigation is keeping on and on litigating when earlier litigation has been unsuccessful and when, on any rational and objective assessment, the time has come to stop.’
There are five major sanctions that the court can apply to vexatious litigants. Briefly, they are:
It is normal for the courts to make such orders for no more than two years at a time.
Obtaining a general civil restraint order can be a useful tool to restrict a vexatious litigant. It is key to ensure that the order made by the court is as specific as possible to ensure it sufficiently restricts the individual in question. Each case must be considered on its own facts to ensure there is sufficient protection for your organisation and employees.
The order obtained should contain a penal notice that confirms if the individual does not obey the terms of the order, they may be sent to jail. The order should also provide that without leave of court, the individual is forbidden from:
While the examples set out above may restrict an individual from issuing court proceedings and applications, and consequently reduce management time and money incurred by you as well as court time and costs, obtaining such an order does not necessarily protect organisations and employees against especially fixated litigants.
In certain circumstances an injunction may also be required to sufficiently protect your employees in cases where threats have been made by vexatious litigants to specific staff members or, more generally, to specific departments. Some sanctions that can be obtained by way of injunction include prohibiting the individual from:
In many instances, obtaining a civil restraint order will provide the desired effects. However, such orders need to be carefully drafted to ensure that they provide the required protection. Restricting an individual’s right to issue court proceedings is a draconian step and courts will only make such an order in very specific instances. In addition, in certain circumstances, an injunction may be required to ensure that your organisation and its employees are sufficiently protected.
In the unfortunate event of being faced with a vexatious or fixated litigant, below are some practical points that you should take into consideration when preparing to take action. Following these suggestions will help: protect your staff and strengthen your position before taking formal action, ensuring you obtain the remedy sought and reduce external costs. Taking positive action will also boost staff morale and show that their safety is paramount.