For years, businessman Paul Millinder has been labelled a vexatious litigant, his pursuit of justice dismissed as obsessive. Yet, his case reveals a troubling pattern of judicial manoeuvring, fraudulent insolvency proceedings, and suppressed evidence.
When I wrote The Chimp, The Computer, and The LiP, I drew heavily on The Chimp Paradox, a book that explains how emotions and logic collide under pressure. The 48 Laws of Power by Robert Greene serves a similar purpose—especially for Litigants in Person (LiPs) navigating high-stakes litigation. Legal battles often feel overwhelming due to procedural complexities, tight deadlines, and aggressive opposition. Greene’s insights on power dynamics can help LiPs maintain strategic control without falling into ethical traps. This article explores five of his most relevant “laws,” adapted for self-representation, ensuring compliance with court rules while maximizing tactical advantage.
Paul Millinder, long dismissed as a vexatious litigant, argues he has been unjustly silenced by the UK courts for exposing judicial misconduct and now seeks justice in Hong Kong.
Discover how The Chimp Paradox can help Litigants in Person control emotions, think strategically, and improve their legal success.
Burnetts Solicitors LLP and Balliol Property Services have failed to respond to serious legal allegations—now they will face the courts, regulators, and public scrutiny.
In an era where justice is increasingly elusive, a disturbing trend has emerged—not from misguided litigants in person (LiPs), but from the legal teams representing powerful respondents.
With legal fees soaring, more people are representing themselves in court as Litigants in Person (LiPs).
Learn how Litigants in Person can avoid common legal pitfalls and improve their chances of success in court through strategic, procedural, and professional approaches.
Learn practical steps to navigate ACAS and Employment Tribunals as a Litigant in Person and overcome the challenges of self-representation.
Drawing from my personal experience with Burnetts Solicitors, I discuss how a firm’s representation of opposing parties can undermine confidentiality and loyalty, ultimately harming the testator’s interests.
