Paddington Garden Company One Limited v Mohammed Ali Abbas Rasool & Anor

Paddington Garden Company One Limited v Mohammed Ali Abbas Rasool & Anor

The court found that Mr Rasool knowingly made false statements in support of multiple without notice applications for injunctions, had no valid tenancy agreements, and deliberately misled the court. All contempts alleged were proved to the requisite standard. The applications were totally without merit and constituted an abuse of process, justifying both committal for contempt and the imposition of a general civil restraint order.

Parties
Claimant: Paddington Garden Company One Limited; First Defendant: Mohammed Ali Abbas Rasool; Second Defendant: Persons Unknown
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 June 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil (contempt and Civil Restraint Order Application) / Judgment After Contested Committal and CRO Application Hearing
Outcome
All contempts proved; general civil restraint order granted against Mr Rasool.
Legal Topics
Committal for Contempt, Civil Restraint Orders, False Statements, Without Notice Applications, Abuse of Process
Civil Procedure Property Law Injunctions Contempt of Court Committal for Contempt Civil Restraint Orders False Statements Without Notice Applications +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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Paddington Garden Company One Limited

Claimant

Mohammed Ali Abbas Rasool

First Defendant

Persons Unknown

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (contempt and Civil Restraint Order Application) / Judgment After Contested Committal and CRO Application Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr Rasool knowingly made false statements in documents verified by a statement of truth
  2. 2 Whether Mr Rasool's applications for injunctions were totally without merit and constituted an abuse of process
  3. 3 Whether a civil restraint order should be issued against Mr Rasool

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that Mr Rasool knowingly made false statements in support of multiple without notice applications for injunctions, had no valid tenancy agreements, and deliberately misled the court. All contempts alleged were proved to the requisite standard. The applications were totally without merit and constituted an abuse of process, justifying both committal for contempt and the imposition of a general civil restraint order.

Court Disposition

All contempts proved; general civil restraint order granted against Mr Rasool.

Orders

  • Mr Rasool found in contempt of court for making false statements in documents verified by a statement of truth.
  • A general civil restraint order is issued against Mr Rasool, prohibiting him from issuing further claims or applications without permission.