RUPERT ST JOHN WEBSTER v JOHN FRANCIS PENLEY & Anor.
[2023] EWHC 1034 (Ch)
Farid El Diwany v Solicitors Regulation Authority Limited
7 July 2023
[2023] EWHC 1707 (Admin)
High Court
A man kept filing lawsuits with no good reason, so a judge stopped him from filing any more without permission first, to protect the courts from being overloaded with pointless cases.
Key Facts
- •Mr. Farid El Diwany repeatedly made applications to the court deemed totally without merit.
- •The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) applied for an extended civil restraint order (ECRO) against Mr. El Diwany.
- •Mr. El Diwany represented himself in the proceedings.
- •The court considered previous applications and orders, including those related to defamation claims and disciplinary tribunal decisions.
- •Mr. El Diwany's conduct included alleged abusive behavior towards individuals involved in previous proceedings.
Legal Principles
Power to make a CRO/ECRO
CPR r 3.11, Practice Direction 3C (PD3C)
Criteria for ECRO
PD3C paragraphs 3.1 to 3.11
Rationale for CROs
Nowak v The Nursing and Midwifery Council [2013] EWHC 1932 (QB)
Definition of 'totally without merit'
Sartipy v Tigris Industries Inc [2019] EWCA Civ 225
Outcomes
ECRO granted against Mr. El Diwany.
Mr. El Diwany persistently issued claims and made applications that were totally without merit, and there's a significant risk he will continue to do so.
Scope of the ECRO defined.
The ECRO covers matters directly or indirectly related to the SRA disciplinary proceedings against Mr. El Diwany.
ECRO duration set to three years.
The court assessed that the risk of further meritless applications will persist for at least three years.