Father restrained from making further meritless applications
As we have explained here previously, in children proceedings between parents the court can make an order, often referred to as a ‘barring order’, preventing a parent from making further applications, without first obtaining the permission of the court.
Barring orders are most often made to protect the children from the harmful effects of repeated litigation.
But the court also has another tool it can use to deter a party from making further applications: the civil restraint order. Civil restraint orders also require that party to obtain the permission of the court before making a further application, but can cover other types of proceedings, not just children applications.
Civil restraint orders can be of three types: limited orders, restraining further applications in existing proceedings; extended orders, covering applications within specified courts; and general orders, covering applications in all county courts and the High Court.
Civil restraint orders are made not so much to protect anyone, but rather to prevent a person from wasting the court’s time. They are not that common in family proceedings, but an example of one being made by a family court occurred last August, when an order was made against a father.
The case did concern children proceedings, but the applications made by the father which gave rise to the order went beyond merely making applications relating to the children.
In fact, the father had made no fewer than six applications, all found to be totally without merit. These included: a contempt application against the mother for lying to the court, when the judge had made no such finding against the mother; an application seeking disclosure of the mother’s citizenship application, which had no bearing upon orders the court might make about the children; and an application for the court to take action against the mother’s solicitors.
The father also made other applications, including an application for a non-molestation order against the mother, which was refused.
In addition, the father had made two appeals, both of which had also been found to be totally without merit.
In the circumstances, the judge found that the father had “pursued litigation in relation to his children beyond reason and without restraint”. He could not be allowed to continue to bombard the mother and the court with applications.
The judge therefore determined that a civil restraint order should be made against the father to stop his repetitive applications, which had required a great deal of court time – time that also has to be used for those who make genuine, meritorious applications.
The judge was also concerned that the father might make applications in other proceedings apart from the children proceedings, for example further non-molestation applications.
Accordingly, the judge made an extended civil restraint order against the father, to remain in place for one year, or until the conclusion of the children proceedings, whichever is the sooner.
You can read the full judgment in the case here.
* * *
Family Law Cafe gives you the best strategy to achieve the right outcome for you and your family and keeps them informed and in control 24/7 through a unique and secure online portal. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.
Image: Bilanol / Shutterstock.com
