Attorney General, R (on the application of) v Cameron

Claims under section 42 of the Supreme Court Act 1981 must be brought using the Part 8 procedure. The requirement applies even where the defendant asserts that disputed questions of fact make Part 7 more suitable. The procedural route follows from the interaction between CPR 8.1(2), CPR 8.1(6), the Part 8 Practice Direction and Table 2, which includes section 42 claims. A challenge to the Treasury Solicitor’s authority to conduct proceedings on behalf of the Attorney General is misconceived where that authority is properly established.

The Attorney General brought proceedings under section 42 of the Supreme Court Act 1981, alleging that Sheila Cameron had habitually and persistently instituted vexatious civil proceedings and made vexatious applications.

Ms Cameron applied to challenge the Treasury Solicitor’s authority and argued that the proceedings should use Part 7 rather than Part 8 because factual disputes existed. She accepted that the authority challenge was unsustainable. The court therefore determined whether section 42 proceedings were required to proceed under Part 8 and whether costs should follow the unsuccessful application.

1. Application rejected. The challenge to the Treasury Solicitor’s authority was plainly misconceived and was no longer pursued.
2. Section 42 proceedings are required to use Part 8 of the Civil Procedure Rules. CPR 8.1(2) permits Part 8 where the court’s decision is unlikely to involve a substantial dispute of fact, or where CPR 8.1(6) applies. CPR 8.1(6) permits a rule or Practice Direction to require or permit Part 8 for specified proceedings.
3. Section 42 claims are included in Table 2 to Section B of the Part 8 Practice Direction. Before 26 April 1999 such claims would have been brought by originating motion in the High Court, and no other procedure is prescribed by an Act, rule or Practice Direction. The Part 8 procedure was therefore mandatory, regardless of the asserted factual disputes.
4. The court noted that Maurice Kay J had reached the same conclusion in Bingham, a decision dated 4 September 2002.
5. The section 42 proceedings were declared properly constituted and directed to proceed. The defendant was ordered to pay the costs of the application, assessed at £500.