AG v Taheri - EAT makes a restriction of proceedings order of indefinite duration under s.33 ETA against a serial claimant, who applies for jobs & brings discrimination claims when turned down, hoping to extract a small settlement.
bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT…
#ukemplaw
bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT…
#ukemplaw
2/ Mr Taheri is one of those well-known serial litigants. He applies for a job, gets turned down & then brings a claim for race, age &/or disability discrimination in the hope of making some money out of it, valuing the claim in the thousands but settling in for hundreds.
3/ He'd never succeeded in any that had gone to hearing, often found vexatious, four times struck out plus a few times subject to deposit orders, with the claim struck out on not paying.
4/ After setting out a chronological account of T's many claims, Eady P satisfied herself that the s.33 test was made out. T's conduct was habitual & persistent, claims were brought without reasonable grounds, the claims were vexatious & the discretion should be exercised. 
5/ As Eady P explained, giving T an RPO of indefinite duration doesn't prevent him from ever bringing a claim again, but means he can only do so with EAT permission, on the EAT finding proceedings aren't an abuse of process and have reasonable grounds.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
