Hashem v Shayif & Anor

Hashem v Shayif & Anor

The court held that the company was not the husband's alter ego, the children’s shareholdings were real, and there was no basis to pierce the corporate veil or find resulting/constructive trusts. The properties belonged to the company, not the husband. Only a revocable licence to occupy 17 Kensington Heights was a nuptial settlement, and the wife was entitled to six months’ notice before removal. The wife’s ancillary relief claim against the husband succeeded in full, but not against the company or children. The bigamous nature of the marriage did not materially affect the award.

Parties
Applicant/defendant: Faiza Ben Hashem; Respondent/part 20 Defendant: Abdulhadi Ali Shayif; Respondent/claimant: Radfan Limited; Claimant: Firas Abdulhadi Shayif; Claimant: Isam Abdulhadi Shayif; Claimant: Aliyah Hadi Shayif; Claimant: Abeer Abdulhadi Shayif
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 September 2008
Procedural Posture
Ancillary Relief and Chancery Proceedings (consolidated) / Final Judgment After Full Trial
Outcome
Wife’s claim for ancillary relief against husband allowed in full; claims against company and children dismissed except for right to notice before removal from 17 Kensington Heights; company and children granted relief in Chancery proceedings subject to that qualification.
Legal Topics
Ancillary Relief, Piercing the Corporate Veil, Resulting and Constructive Trusts, Variation of Nuptial Settlements, Bigamous Marriage and Ancillary Relief, Ownership of Company Assets in Divorce
Family Law Company Law Trusts and Equity Ancillary Relief Piercing the Corporate Veil Resulting and Constructive Trusts Variation of Nuptial Settlements Bigamous Marriage and Ancillary Relief +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 20
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Faiza Ben Hashem

Applicant/defendant

Abdulhadi Ali Shayif

Respondent/part 20 Defendant

Radfan Limited

Respondent/claimant

Firas Abdulhadi Shayif

Claimant

Isam Abdulhadi Shayif

Claimant

Aliyah Hadi Shayif

Claimant

Abeer Abdulhadi Shayif

Claimant

Procedural Posture

Ancillary Relief and Chancery Proceedings (consolidated) / Final Judgment After Full Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court can pierce the corporate veil to treat company assets as the husband's for ancillary relief
  2. 2 Whether the children’s shareholdings in the company are held on resulting trusts for the husband
  3. 3 Whether the company holds properties on constructive trust for the husband

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the company was not the husband's alter ego, the children’s shareholdings were real, and there was no basis to pierce the corporate veil or find resulting/constructive trusts. The properties belonged to the company, not the husband. Only a revocable licence to occupy 17 Kensington Heights was a nuptial settlement, and the wife was entitled to six months’ notice before removal. The wife’s ancillary relief claim against the husband succeeded in full, but not against the company or children. The bigamous nature of the marriage did not materially affect the award.

Court Disposition

Wife’s claim for ancillary relief against husband allowed in full; claims against company and children dismissed except for right to notice before removal from 17 Kensington Heights; company and children granted relief in Chancery proceedings subject to that qualification.

Orders

  • Husband to pay wife a lump sum of £7,061,570 (subject to set-off for value of properties and loan account)
  • Husband to transfer or cause to be transferred to wife 17 Kensington Heights and 57 Forest House (with set-off for value)