Justice For Families

This is a copy and paste of an email sent to me.
Can the truth be fonfirmed?



Please note that as of October 1st 2007 anyone with section 91(14) orer has to pay full cost of application even if on benefits.




This is cruel and deliberate denial of access to Justice.




Vexatious Litigants

8.
(1) This paragraph applies where—


(a) a restraint order is in force against a party;


(b) the party makes an application for permission to—


(i) issue proceedings or take a step in proceedings as required by the restraint order;


(ii) apply for amendment or discharge of the order; or


(iii) appeal the order.


(2) The fee prescribed for the application by Schedule 1 to this Order shall be payable in full.


(3) If the court grants the permission requested there shall be refunded to the applicant the difference between—


(a) the fee paid; and


(b) the fee that would have been payable if this Schedule had been applied without reference to this paragraph

What is the cost involved? I've not heard of this and will find out asap.
Can you tell me where you got this from NRP?

It was emailed to me....well the email has been forwarded a few times and somewhere along the lines, I got copied into the mailing list.

I would assumt the cost to be either £40 - £50 if the application is on a C2 or the usual £180 odd if the application is on a C1.

Somehow, I would expect that the application will be made during procedings, so the cost should be about £50 odd.

No I have not had to pay for any of the applications I made. I am making a variation of ther order i have obtained this week...

No I have not had to pay for any of the applications I made. I am making a variation of ther order i have obtained this week...

Does this apply if a S91(14) is in place and someone makes an application or is it if a S91(14) is granted?
Have you heard anymore about this?
I know someone who had a S91(14) slapped on them around this time so I shall ask.
Thanks for the reminder - I had forgotten

Sorry, but can I ask, What is a S91(14)

Thanks

sueb wrote:Sorry, but can I ask, What is a S91(14)

A court order that orders the named person to not make any application to court for the named child, without first getting permission from the court.

The order is to stop vervisterous litigants. (litigants making applications to court which are counterproductive and aren't going to get anywhere, or for causing problems for the other party)

Vexatious?

johnhemming wrote:Vexatious?

That's the word and spelling I was wanting.

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1989/uk ... -pb5-l1g91

This copy and paste is from the children act. I added 15 to 17, so you can read about the effect that an application might have......

(14) On disposing of any application for an order under this Act, the court may (whether or not it makes any other order in response to the application) order that no application for an order under this Act of any specified kind may be made with respect to the child concerned by any person named in the order without leave of the court.

(15) Where an application (“the previous application”) has been made for—

(a) the discharge of a care order;

(b) the discharge of a supervision order;

(c) the discharge of an education supervision order;

(d) the substitution of a supervision order for a care order; or

(e) a child assessment order,

no further application of a kind mentioned in paragraphs (a) to (e) may be made with respect to the child concerned, without leave of the court, unless the period between the disposal of the previous application and the making of the further application exceeds six months.

(16) Subsection (15) does not apply to applications made in relation to interim orders.

(17) Where—

(a) a person has made an application for an order under section 34;

(b) the application has been refused; and

(c) a period of less than six months has elapsed since the refusal,

that person may not make a further application for such an order with respect to the same child, unless he has obtained the leave of the court.

NRP , under data protection act will someone else ask Jack Straw how much money is made by the courts charging for this:

Or will it not be able to be stored on his computer , I only as how much VAT to add insult to injury over this draconian law being liberally used.

The tax man by the way was the 1 to take down Al Capone who will be the official in Government to take down the figures in the interests of the general public.

I have posted up on www.Lyndamac.com

The reply from MP Jack Straw , also Caffcass if you back track and ask questions about all of the data you will see how corrupt the system really is.

Back handers to lose files .