Court defines test for granting an extended civil restraint order against litigant in person

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2015/734.html

The respondent is a litigant in person who had her application for various orders against the Society of Lloyd's struck out and certified that it was totally without merit. Lloyd's applied for a further extended civil restraint order against her. Lewis J held that, when deciding wither to make such an order, the court was entitled to have regard to all the claims or applications made which were totally without merit and was not limited to considering solely the claims and applications made since the expiry of the latest extended civil restraint order. Since the litigant in person here had made a total of seven such applications, the court did have a power to make the order. Furthermore, this was an appropriate case for exercising the court's discretion to make such an order since there was a very high risk that if the order was not made, the litigant would continue to make totally unmeritorious applications. The extended civil restraint order which was made will last for 2 years.