Shahraab Ahmad v Karim Ouajjou & Anor

Shahraab Ahmad v Karim Ouajjou & Anor

The admitted breaches of the worldwide freezing orders by both defendants were serious, deliberate, and undermined the administration of justice. The apologies and explanations offered were not credible or genuine, and the absence of the defendants from the hearing further undermined their mitigation. The breaches warranted immediate custodial sentences, and there was insufficient mitigation to justify suspension, even considering the presence of young children and current prison conditions. The first defendant should not be debarred from pursuing a counterclaim as such a sanction would be disproportionate.

Parties
Claimant: Shahraab Ahmad; First Defendant: Karim Ouajjou; Second Defendant: Yasmin Al Sahoud Perez
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 December 2024
Procedural Posture
Contempt Application (civil) / Sentencing Judgment After Admission of Contempt
Outcome
Immediate custodial sentences for contempt of court imposed on both defendants; application to debar first defendant from counterclaim refused.
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Worldwide Freezing Order, Sentencing for Contempt, Asset Dissipation, Mitigation in Contempt Proceedings
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Contempt of Court Worldwide Freezing Order Sentencing for Contempt Asset Dissipation Mitigation in Contempt Proceedings

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 4 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shahraab Ahmad

Claimant

Karim Ouajjou

First Defendant

Yasmin Al Sahoud Perez

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Contempt Application (civil) / Sentencing Judgment After Admission of Contempt

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the appropriate sentence for admitted breaches of a worldwide freezing order by the defendants?
  2. 2 Should the sentences be suspended in light of mitigation, including the presence of young children and alleged lack of harm?
  3. 3 Should the first defendant be debarred from pursuing a counterclaim due to contempt?

Ratio Decidendi

The admitted breaches of the worldwide freezing orders by both defendants were serious, deliberate, and undermined the administration of justice. The apologies and explanations offered were not credible or genuine, and the absence of the defendants from the hearing further undermined their mitigation. The breaches warranted immediate custodial sentences, and there was insufficient mitigation to justify suspension, even considering the presence of young children and current prison conditions. The first defendant should not be debarred from pursuing a counterclaim as such a sanction would be disproportionate.

Court Disposition

Immediate custodial sentences for contempt of court imposed on both defendants; application to debar first defendant from counterclaim refused.

Orders

  • Karim Ouajjou (D1) committed to immediate custody for nine months for breach of the worldwide freezing order.
  • Yasmin Al Sahoud Perez (D2) committed to immediate custody for nine months for sale of the Madrid property, six months concurrently for accepting the transfer, and three months concurrently for exceeding living expenses limit.