2 ms·
> Their costs will be substantial and the rules do not allow them to recover them from a non-vexatious claimant... Do the rules allow them to bring the questio
by wwweston 8y ago
> Their costs will be substantial and the rules do not allow them to recover them from a non-vexatious claimant...
Do the rules allow them to bring the question of whether the claimant is non-vexatious to litigation?
- qhwudbebd 8y agoI've been a claimant from time to time but am not a solicitor, so you'd need to ask a proper lawyer. Nobody has even tried anything like that in any of my claims, it's deliberately a very high bar, but as far as I know, it'd be a decision you'd ask the judge to make at the end, in the same way you ask for your court fee when the respondent refused your offer to settle in the notice-before-action.
- Pharmakon 8y agoThe first test in U.K. common law is whether or not the case has any merit; not a losing case, not mistaken, but without merit. The kind of case we’re typically talking about are either fraudulent, or completely bonkers, and that’s what this is meant to prevent. Second, the vexatious litigant is a serial offender, not just some fool who doesn’t understand how the courts are meant to work. Someone claiming their livelihood was impinged on by termination of their accounts by Google, given said termination actually occurred and not in the context of a criminal enterprise won’t meet that standard. Not a chance. Now if you made dozens of accounts and sued over each one, or were a spammer, drug dealer, etc... that would probably annoy a judge.