Shahraab Ahmad v Karim Ouajjou & Anor

Shahraab Ahmad v Karim Ouajjou & Anor

The appeal against sentence is dismissed because the breaches of the freezing orders were serious, deliberate, and only admitted when discovery was imminent; the judge correctly applied the relevant legal principles, gave appropriate weight to mitigation, and the sentences imposed were not excessive or inappropriate. The only adjustment is to quash the three-month sentence for the overspend on living expenses, as it would not alone have passed the custody threshold.

Parties
Respondent/claimant: Shahraab Ahmad; Appellant/defendant: Karim Ouajjou; Appellant/defendant: Yasmin Al Sahoud Perez
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 June 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (contempt of Court) / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Appeal dismissed save for quashing the three-month sentence for overspend on living expenses.
Legal Topics
Breach of Freezing Orders, Sentencing for Contempt, Mitigation in Contempt Proceedings, Suspension of Custodial Sentences
Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Breach of Freezing Orders Sentencing for Contempt Mitigation in Contempt Proceedings Suspension of Custodial Sentences

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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shahraab Ahmad

Respondent/claimant

Karim Ouajjou

Appellant/defendant

Yasmin Al Sahoud Perez

Appellant/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (contempt of Court) / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the custodial sentences for contempt of court were excessive or should have been suspended
  2. 2 Whether the judge gave appropriate weight to mitigation, admissions, and impact on children
  3. 3 Whether the judge erred in her assessment of the seriousness of the contempts

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal against sentence is dismissed because the breaches of the freezing orders were serious, deliberate, and only admitted when discovery was imminent; the judge correctly applied the relevant legal principles, gave appropriate weight to mitigation, and the sentences imposed were not excessive or inappropriate. The only adjustment is to quash the three-month sentence for the overspend on living expenses, as it would not alone have passed the custody threshold.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed save for quashing the three-month sentence for overspend on living expenses.

Orders

  • Sentence of three months' imprisonment for Ms Perez for overspend on living expenses quashed; no separate penalty imposed for this contempt.
  • All other sentences and orders upheld.