Written by For many, navigating the legal system without professional representation is a daunting task. Known as Litigants in Person (LiPs), these individuals take on the courts without the benefit of a solicitor or barrister, often due to financial constraints or a deep belief in their own cause. While some manage their cases successfully, others fall into a dangerous legal trap—pushing their claims too far and triggering a Civil Restraint Order (CRO).
A CRO is the court’s way of dealing with persistent, meritless, or abusive litigation. For LiPs, it represents a severe restriction on their ability to bring future legal challenges and can have devastating personal and financial consequences.
What Is a Civil Restraint Order?
A Civil Restraint Order (CRO) is issued by the court to prevent individuals from making repeated, baseless applications. It exists to protect the judicial system from being clogged with frivolous litigation and to prevent one party from unduly burdening the other with constant legal challenges. CROs come in three forms:
- Limited CRO: Prevents further applications in the same case without permission from a judge.
- Extended CRO: Prevents applications in any case relating to the same or similar matters.
- General CRO: The most severe, blocking the individual from filing any claim in the High Court, County Court, or tribunals for up to two years without prior court approval.
For LiPs who find themselves on the wrong side of a CRO, the restrictions can be catastrophic, effectively shutting them out of the justice system.
How LiPs Fall Into the CRO Trap
LiPs are often driven by a strong sense of injustice. Without legal training, many believe they are uncovering procedural errors or misconduct that the courts have overlooked. This leads them to repeatedly challenge decisions, often without understanding the legal boundaries of reasonable litigation.
Common Triggers for a CRO
- Relitigating the Same Issues: Courts are bound by finality in litigation. When a claim is struck out, continuing to challenge the same points will quickly be seen as an abuse of process.
- Flooding the Court with Correspondence: Sending excessive emails, reapplying for the same orders, or refusing to accept rulings can be perceived as vexatious conduct.
- Challenging Every Adverse Decision: Believing that any loss in court must be due to bias or procedural unfairness, rather than legal merit, often leads to repeated and unfounded appeals.
- Personalising the Case: Shifting from legal arguments to personal attacks on judges, legal representatives, or opposing parties undermines credibility and reinforces the perception of unreasonable behaviour.
The Impact of a Civil Restraint Order
Once a CRO is in place, the consequences are severe:
- Legal Paralysis: The individual is blocked from bringing further claims or applications unless they first obtain the court’s permission, which is rarely granted.
- Financial Burden: Many LiPs who receive a CRO have already lost substantial sums in legal costs, and further challenges only worsen their financial position.
- Reputational Damage: A CRO is a judicial declaration that the individual is engaging in unreasonable litigation, which can affect their standing in future legal matters and even their professional life.
- Loss of Access to Justice: While the intention behind a CRO is to protect the courts from abuse, for those who genuinely believe in their cause, it feels like an impenetrable barrier to justice.
Avoiding the CRO Trap
For LiPs, the best way to avoid falling into the CRO trap is to recognise when persistence becomes counterproductive. This means:
- Accepting Adverse Decisions: Even if a ruling feels unfair, understanding that not every loss is grounds for appeal is key.
- Seeking Professional Advice Early: Even one-off legal advice can help in understanding whether a claim has merit.
- Focusing on Strategy, Not Emotion: Courts respond to well-reasoned arguments, not personal grievances.
- Knowing When to Walk Away: Sometimes, moving on is the most strategic decision.
Conclusion
While the courts must protect themselves from abusive litigation, LiPs often fall into the CRO trap unknowingly. What begins as a fight for justice can spiral into a series of legal missteps that ultimately shut them out of the very system they turned to for help. Recognising the warning signs early and seeking structured, strategic guidance can mean the difference between a well-handled case and a court order that blocks access to justice entirely.