Vexatious Litigants

In Attorney General v Messi [2026] EAT 34, the EAT granted a restriction of proceedings order (‘RPO’) against an individual who had brought over 50 employment tribunal claims typically arising from unsuccessful job applications. Her allegations commonly included discrimination and/or whistleblowing detriment. The claims were variously struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success, or withdrawn.

The Attorney General applied for a restriction of proceedings order (RPO) under S.33 of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996. This permits the EAT to impose such an order where a person has ‘habitually and persistently and without any reasonable ground instituted… vexatious proceedings… or made vexatious applications’.

The EAT held that the conditions for making an RPO were satisfied. M’s conduct had caused substantial prejudice to respondents and the tribunal alike.

The EAT therefore granted the order, with the effect that M can institute no proceedings in an employment tribunal or the EAT without the EAT’s permission.