Mandatory statute. No discretion. 10 orders void. Opens everything.
10 orders made during the Mental Health Crisis Moratorium (28 Dec 2024 to 16 Apr 2025) are void ab initio under Regulation 7(12) DSRR 2020. Each order is void not merely because of when it was made but because of what it contains and what it does. The DDJ Wood order (6 January 2025, MHCM Day 9) fraudulently inserted costs "forthwith GBP 22,528" (enforcement), an unless strike-out (conditional enforcement), and a retrospective extension validating the late Defence. The Master Kaye costs stay (6 February 2025, MHCM Day 40) conditioned the proceedings on payment of void costs (enforcement of debt). Every order that depends on or follows from the 6 February costs stay is also void as a derivative nullity. The LCRO (27 February 2025, MHCM Day 61) restricts the debtor's access to the court (enforcement). The TWM certifications are enforcement acts. The statutory prohibition is mandatory and admits no discretion.
Reg 7(12) DSRR 2020; Lees v Kaye [2022] EWHC 1151 (QB)
What the opponent will argue, and why they are wrong.
Orders are voidable not void. Time limits apply. Most orders are out of time.
Reg 7(12) uses mandatory 'shall be null and void'. Lees v Kaye [2022] EWHC 1151: no discretion. Jalla v Shell [2023] UKSC 16: absolute prohibition = nullity, not voidable. Phillips v Symes [2002] 1 WLR 853: no time limit for void orders. Isaacs v Robertson [1985] AC 97: delay does not cure nullity.
Court did not have actual notice of the MHCM when orders were made.
Written notification sent 29 December 2024 (email receipt confirmed). Oral notification at DDJ Wood hearing 20 December 2024. Court email 29.12.2024 acknowledged receipt. All subsequent orders post-date notification.
MHCM only applies to 'enforcement action' not all court orders.
Reg 7(12) provides court 'must not make an order or exercise enforcement powers'. The word 'order' is unrestricted. Lees v Kaye treated all enforcement-period orders as void. Costs orders, unless orders, strike-outs, and restraint orders are all enforcement actions. Kaye v Lees [2023] confirmed the moratorium is absolute.
The MHCM was obtained tactically to frustrate proceedings.
MHCM requires certification by an Approved Mental Health Professional. It is clinically assessed, not self-selected. Michael's ADHD diagnosis dates from approximately 2014. Dr Woolley's psychiatric report is on file. The suggestion insults the clinical judgment of the AMHP and is itself evidence of the disability discrimination that pervades these proceedings.
Official government-issued certificate. Statutory instrument. Not arguable.
Each order is individually dated within the MHCM period. Costs figures are stated on the face of each order.
Fallback: Deploy the 7 delay defences. LCRO attacked on 3 non-MHCM grounds. Orders voidable but still challengeable.
Independence: Partially dependent on other grounds succeeding.
| Date | Judge | Type | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6 January 2025 | DDJ Wood | Unless Order / Costs Order | VOID |
| 5 February 2025 | Master Kaye | s.130(2) Leave Refusal | VOID |
| 6 February 2025 | Master Kaye | Master's Ruling (Interim Payment) | VOID |
| 6 February 2025 | Master Kaye | Stay & Strike Out Order | VOID |
| 20 February 2025 | Master Kaye | Ex Parte Stay Dismissal | VOID |
| 27 February 2025 | Master Kaye | Costs Order | VOID |
| 27 February 2025 | Master Kaye | Limited Civil Restraint Order | VOID |
| 27 February 2025 | Master Kaye | N460 Permission Refusal | VOID |
| 27 February 2025 | Master Kaye | Stay of Enforcement Order | VOID |
| 27 February 2025 | Master Kaye | Pre-service Stay Order | VOID |