Stephen John Finnan has been made subject to an extended civil restraint order after the High Court struck out his renewed claim against Charles Russell Speechlys LLP as an abuse of process. The court applied the abuse-of-process principle associated with Henderson v Henderson and also found the renewed claims were time-barred. Attendance notes, advice records and correspondence may prove decisive if a former client later seeks to recast an unsuccessful claim. The decision also reminds advocates that an extended civil restraint order does not prevent access to the courts entirely; it requires prior judicial permission for claims or applications covered by the order. Repeated proceedings can impose substantial costs on both law firms and their insurers, particularly where applications revisit issues already decided.