Call our National Helpline on 0300 0300 363
Monday to Friday between 6pm and 10pm
The UK's leading Shared Parenting charity
Section 91(14)
Where a judge considers that a litigant is being 'vexatious' or 'oppressive' in pursuing his case he may make an order under section 91(14) of the Children Act 1989 preventing the litigant from making any further applications without prior permission.
This restriction is meant to be reserved for the most extreme cases, but is often applied to fathers who are seeking a reasonable level of contact with their own children. Once made, the order can be difficult to overturn.
The Court of Appeal ruled in In re F (Minors)(Contact: Restraint order) The Times, 2.2.1995 that:
"The exercise of the power given by section 91(14) of the Children Act 1989 enabling a person to be restrained from making an application under the Act without first obtaining the leave of the court was a draconian measure of last resort. It would normally only be appropriate to make an order to prevent a threatened abuse by vexatious or oppressive parties of the right of access to the courts afforded by the Act."
The case before the Court of Appeal concerned the imposition of a restraining order on a father by a lower court. In the original case the mother's implacable hostility to any contact between father and child was deemed to be "so deeply rooted, and so total, that she will never agree to contact and she will always do her best to try and make sure that it doesn't happen." Rather than doing anything about the problem, the judge had decided that the father's application for contact was doomed to failure and barred him from making further applications.
The Court of Appeal (Waite LJ and Nourse LJ presiding) was critical of this decision: the father had been "neither vexatious nor oppressive in his genuine attempts to further the welfare of his daughters by maintaining contact with them".
The position was re-stated in Re R (Residence: Contact: Restricting Applications)[1998] 1 FLR 749, but section 91(14) orders continue to be made against fathers with disturbing frequency.
For further case law references see the Shared Parenting Information Group website
Updated 14 November, 2005
