The case was struck out on Monday and Mr Syvret was ordered to pay the costs.
The former senator had tried to sue the Chief Minister, the former Attorney General, the States of Jersey and the Employment Board.
He argued that they had a duty of care to support him as Health Minister when he tried to expose a conspiracy of civil servants to cover up child abuse.
Mr Syvret had told the court that the events of the past few years had affected his health and had left him de facto bankrupt.
On Monday the judge, Jonathan Sumption, ruled the case should be struck out and that Mr Syvret should pay the States' legal costs.
He tried to sue the States for damages, claiming public officials had engaged in a conspiracy against him when he was dismissed from the post of Health Minister in 2007.
He says they engaged in a plot to cover up child abuse in the island, which he was trying to expose, causing harm to his emotional and physical health as a result.
The judge said none of the defendants owed him a duty of care as a private individual and that he was the "author of his own misfortune".
He said Syvret was trying to bring a private claim against a public wrong, at a time when he, as a public person, possessed no greater rights than anyone else.
Jonathan Sumption QC also refused to authorise a judicial review- which would have subjected the powers of public authority to scrutiny- and ordered Mr. Syvret to pay the defendants' costs.
After the judgment Mr. Syvret said: "I've done my best, indeed I thought it was quite funny in a tragic kind of way that Mr. Sumption suggested in the judgment that the stress, the harm, the difficulty I had suffered in 2007 in trying to expose these child protection failures and being opposed by the civil servants was self inflicted upon me, that I needn't have done that work, therefore I had no claim, which I think sends a very terrible message to public officials, that essentially means anyone who's in my position needn't bother to doing their duty, need not bother taking on significant challenges in their job, because if it's difficult and bad for you to do that then that's just tough."
Mr. Syvret claims he had a legal obligation as Health Minister to investigate allegations of child abuse, but that he was intentionally obstructed by public officials from carrying out his duties.
The predictable; all thrown out on strike-out - which means that for various legal and technical arguments - the case never got into the facts - or the rights and wrongs - or the evidence.
But as remarked by me and others on many previous occasions, that was the entirely expected outcome.
But don't worry - other cases are in the offing; cases that deal with different matters - on different causes of action - in different time-frames - and more clearly defined within either public law or private law.
Legally - we're barely warming up yet.
There should be two fresh JR applications in by the end of this week.
As far as the judgment today is concerned - and this was so profoundly concerning from public interest point of view, I shall probably write an entire posting about it once I have the written judgment of Jonathan Sumption - was his assertion that the harassment, repression and harm I suffered in 2007 - was my own fault - as no-one was forcing me to represent child abuse victims, speak with them, listen to them and to fight against the system that had failed them.
His argument was that by choosing to shoulder the burdens of my Office - I was "the author of my own misfortune".
His view is that, as I could have ignored the approaches of the child abuse victims - and not spoken with them - and not tried to help them - getting into the battle I did was "voluntary" by me - and therefore no-one else's fault.
How's that for a message - and a precedent - to send to your elected representatives?
Dangerous and dishonest crooks like Bill Ogley walk away with half-a-million pounds of tax-payers money - plus gold-plated pension - for being an utter shyster.
I, a politician at the time - get oppressed and damaged by people like Ogley and his colleagues - because I was trying to do my lawful duty to help child abuse victims - and I can't even get my claim into court.
Isn't that great?
If that's how notions of "accountability" and "responsibility" operate in Jersey's public administration - it's hardly surprising orphans were being battered and raped over a five-decade period - and not one single solitary Jersey politician ever spoke out about it - until me.
The lesson from Mr. Sumption: "I should have just kept my mouth shut and my head down - just like all the rest."
And you thought the general 'performance' of your States members was rubbish already?
After today - they've been given carte blanche - the absolute green-light - to henceforth ignore all of their legal duties.
The precedent set now gives them a legal basis - a legal excuse - for their customary contemptible failures.
I'm not sure which was funnier - that part of the judgment - or Diane Simon from the JEP attempting to ask me questions afterwards, and when I refused to speak with her, her saying to a member of the public, "we only want to be fair to him".
Suffer the little children.