Siddik Mohammad v Mohammad Hilal Salim Bin Tarraf & Ors

Siddik Mohammad v Mohammad Hilal Salim Bin Tarraf & Ors

The registration of the Ontario Default Judgment must be set aside as against the First Defendant because none of the jurisdictional criteria under section 4(2)(a) of the 1933 Act were satisfied, the First Defendant did not receive actual notice of the proceedings in sufficient time to defend and did not appear, and there was a substantial breach of the duty of full and frank disclosure in the registration application.

Parties
Claimant: Siddik Mohammad; First Defendant: Mohammad Hilal Salim bin Tarraf; Second Defendant: Bani Yas General Trade International; Third Defendant: Al Jazira Poultry Farm LLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 February 2025
Procedural Posture
Application to Set Aside Registration of Foreign Judgment / Judgment on Application
Outcome
Application to set aside registration of Default Judgment as against First Defendant granted.
Legal Topics
Foreign Judgment Enforcement, Jurisdiction, Service of Process, Duty of Full and Frank Disclosure, Article 6 ECHR, Forum of Necessity
Private International Law Civil Procedure Human Rights Foreign Judgment Enforcement Jurisdiction Service of Process Duty of Full and Frank Disclosure Article 6 ECHR +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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Siddik Mohammad

Claimant

Mohammad Hilal Salim bin Tarraf

First Defendant

Bani Yas General Trade International

Second Defendant

Al Jazira Poultry Farm LLC

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application to Set Aside Registration of Foreign Judgment / Judgment on Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Ontario Court had jurisdiction under the Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act 1933
  2. 2 Whether the First Defendant received notice of the Ontario proceedings in sufficient time to defend
  3. 3 Whether there was a breach of duty of full and frank disclosure in the registration application

Ratio Decidendi

The registration of the Ontario Default Judgment must be set aside as against the First Defendant because none of the jurisdictional criteria under section 4(2)(a) of the 1933 Act were satisfied, the First Defendant did not receive actual notice of the proceedings in sufficient time to defend and did not appear, and there was a substantial breach of the duty of full and frank disclosure in the registration application.

Court Disposition

Application to set aside registration of Default Judgment as against First Defendant granted.

Orders

  • Order of Master Eastman registering the Ontario Default Judgment set aside as against Mohammad Hilal Salim bin Tarraf.
  • Registration remains in force as against Second and Third Defendants.