QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISIONAL COURT
B e f o r e :
MR JUSTICE SULLIVAN
|HER MAJESTY'S ATTORNEY GENERAL||(CLAIMANT)|
Smith Bernal Wordwave Limited
190 Fleet Street London EC4A 2AG
Tel No: 020 7404 1400 Fax No: 020 7831 8838
(Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)
THE DEFENDANT APPEARED IN PERSON
Crown Copyright ©
LORD JUSTICE BROOKE:
2. The applicable law:
"If, on an application made by the Attorney General under this section, the High Court is satisfied that any person has habitually and persistently and without any reasonable ground -
(a) instituted vexatious civil proceedings, whether in the High Court or any inferior court, and whether against the same person or against different persons; or
(b) made vexatious applications in any civil proceedings, whether in the High Court or any inferior court, and whether instituted by him or another...
The court may, after hearing that person or giving him an opportunity of being heard, make a civil proceedings order...
(1A) In this section -
"civil proceedings order" means an order that -
(a) no civil proceedings shall without the leave of the High Court be instituted in any court by the person against whom the order is made;
(b) any civil proceedings instituted by him in any court before the making of the order shall not be continued by him without the leave of the High Court; and
(c) no application (other than one for leave under this section) shall be made by him, in any civil proceedings instituted in any court by any person, without the leave of the High Court...
(2) An order under subsection (1) may provide that it is to cease to have effect at the end of a specified period, but shall otherwise remain in force indefinitely."
"In considering whether any proceedings are vexatious one is entitled to, and must look at, the whole history of the matter, and it is not determined by whether the pleading discloses a cause of action. Indeed, that is the principle applied under the rules of court when application is made to strike out a pleading. Though the pleading may be in order, the court, in its inherent jurisdiction, is entitled to look at affidavits as to the history of the matter, and if, in the light of that history the action is vexatious, the pleading can be struck out and the action dismissed."
"The hallmark [of applications under section 42] usually is that the [claimant] sues the same party repeatedly in reliance on essentially the same cause of action, perhaps with minor variations, after it has been ruled upon, thereby imposing on defendants the burden of resisting claim after claim; that the claimant relies on essentially the same cause of action, perhaps with minor variations, after it has been ruled upon, in actions against successive parties who if they were to be sued at all should have been joined in the same action; that the claimant automatically challenges every adverse decision on appeal; and that the claimant refuses to take any notice of or give effect to orders of the court. 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."
3. Litigation pursued by the defendant - an overview:
4. Hackney Carriage Licence litigation:
(i) Action 1:
(ii) Action 2:
(iii) Actions 3 and 4:
(iv) Action 5:
(v) Action 6:
(vi) Action 16:
(vii) Action 14 and 15:
(viii) Actions 17, 18 and 19:
"Your word has no credibility whatsoever in view of the multiple deceptions, attempted frauds, using the legal process in collusion with a crooked, bent, corrupt solicitor as well as setting up illegal accounts to bypass the District Auditor and to pocket the proceeds of those deceptions and frauds."
5. Actions relating to benefits:
(i) Actions 7-10 and 13:
(ii) Actions 11 and 12:
(iii) Action 20:
6. Actions relating to Mr & Mrs Rainbow:
(i) Actions 21 to 23:
(ii) Action 24:
(iii) Action 26:
Actions 27 and 29-31:
(v) Action 28:
"I mean that's the way I am, you know, once I get involved in litigation I sort of tend to go a bit over the top..."
"Well, it's regrettable you know, I mean I just sort of, you know when I get involved in these legal cases I go a bit over the top sometimes, you know... it's all part and parcel of the fun of it when you get involved in litigation like this, you know, you just sort of get, I just get a bit abusive because I do my own litigation, I mean, you know, because I don't get legal aid... these things are written in the heat of the moment, you know, I mean I shouldn't think anybody would take any notice of it at all..."
"It's all part and parcel of the fun, you know, it's part of the game to me. You know that I hurl abuse at the other party's solicitors, you know, I mean, I mean what it does you see, it provokes correspondence because solicitors have to reply, it bumps up the costs, because every time a letter goes off, there's more money goes down on the client file. I mean that's one of the techniques you use isn't it... if [they are paying for it] it would have cost the Rainbows an awful lot of money, I mean it's one of the techniques I use."
"... we've just been through the County Court err, and thirteen thousand six hundred pounds in court costs had been claimed somewhere along the line, now without the shadow of a doubt, I'm not going to pay it..."
"... so what there (sic) going to do, there (sic) going to do the job for us because they'll turn round to the Rainbows and say you will have to sell your house to pay our bill, so there is a method in my madness if you get my drift and I'm not as daft as bloody look... you see and so errm, you see there (sic) own solicitors are going to do the job for us, alright because we've got, not just this case that's just gone through the County Court at the cost of thirteen thousand six hundred pounds but we've got two more summonses going through..."
"... I can tell you now at the rate of thirteen thousand six hundred pounds per case, I've calculated that I need to fire off seven cases against the Rainbows to get it up to a hundred thousand pounds."
"I'm just wondering when the insurance company is going, if the penny is going to drop on the insurance company that they've got to (sic) a serial litigant on there (sic) hands who's going to drive the costs up to a hundred thousand, two hundred thousand."
He also said: "None of my claims are justified."
8. General Observations:
"As far as I am aware Mahon is the subject of numerous awards of costs, all of which remain unsatisfied. It is also my belief that given Mahon's reliance upon state benefit and in the absence of assets there is little or no prospect of successful recovery of the costs awarded against Mahon.
The net result is that the local authorities and behind them the ratepayers are therefore out of pocket to the tune of several thousand pounds as a result of Mahon's actions. I ask the Court to consider that Mahon is deemed fee exempt when he makes application and therefore can do so at no cost other than his own time; but with each and every time a defendant to a Mahon claim wishes to make application for Mahon to be struck out - then a fee is payable, just as it is on taxation - without return."