The High Court has definitively barred a former solicitor, Anal Sheikh, from reigniting a series of litigations against key legal bodies, marking a significant legal decision that underscores the ramifications of vexatious litigation behaviour.
Mr Justice Mellor delivered a decisive ruling refusing Ms Sheikh’s attempt to relaunch previous legal challenges, which targeted the Law Society, Bar Council, and a host of senior judges and solicitors. The judge starkly remarked that Ms Sheikh “appears to have lost all touch with reality and reason,” advising her to cease her relentless focus on challenging the powers of the Law Society and to accept the rulings issued against her.
Ms Sheikh’s history with the legal system is extensive. Originally a conveyancing solicitor, she was stripped of her practising rights by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal in 2009 due to dishonesty. That same year, she became the subject of a general civil restraint order, which has been renewed biennially. In 2019, this was escalated to an ‘all proceedings order’ rendering her unable to initiate civil or criminal proceedings indefinitely without the High Court’s approval.
The High Court’s recent session, requested by Ms Sheikh, sought permission to reopen 31 resolved cases along with the introduction of new proceedings. Mellor J outlined that her ambitions extended far beyond these 37 matters, revealing a demand for the Law Society to compensate solicitors £1.2 billion and for actions against the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal that stretch back to 1974.
In a catalogue of documents, Ms Sheikh drew parallels to the infamous ‘Post Office Scandal’, alleging that the Law Society’s interventions amounted to an even more egregious misuse of justice. Mellor J noted that her claims encompassed a vast conspiracy implicating judges, legal counsel, and even those who formerly represented her, labelling these accusations as “pure fantasy.”
Allowing Ms Sheikh’s pursuit would unleash extensive and repetitive legal actions that Mellor J emphasised would tantamount to ‘an abuse of process’. He firmly concluded that the allegations were of extreme seriousness but with no basis in reality, thus should not proceed under section 42(3) of the Senior Courts Act 1981.
In a postscript to his judgment, Mellor J predicted Ms Sheikh would indict him as part of the alleged conspiracy against her. During the ruling’s preparation, she initiated unsolicited communications with judiciary staff, which only reinforced Mellor J’s conclusions about her conduct.
The High Court’s ruling serves as a definitive stance against misuse of the legal system, highlighting both the institutional resilience to baseless claims and the ongoing challenges posed by those who persist with vexatious litigation.
