Ahmad & Anor v Faraj [2025] EWCA Civ 468 (10 April 2025)

Ahmad & Anor v Faraj [2025] EWCA Civ 468 (10 April 2025)

The husband's failure to pay the LSPO is deliberate and wilful contempt. The criteria for a Hadkinson order are met: the husband is in contempt, the contempt is deliberate and continuing, it impedes the course of justice by preventing the wife from being represented, there is no other effective remedy, and the order is proportionate. The husband's appeal shall not be heard unless and until the LSPO is paid in full. An immediate unless order would be disproportionate; a Hadkinson order is the appropriate and proportionate remedy.

Citation
[2025] EWCA Civ 468
Parties
Defendant/appellant: Sohail Sultan Ahmad; Defendant/appellant: IIB Group Holdings W. L. L.; Applicant/respondent: Meerna Ali Ghuloom Faraj
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 April 2025
Procedural Posture
Appeal (family/financial Remedy) / Case Management and Interlocutory Orders Pending Substantive Appeal
Outcome
Husband's appeal stayed unless and until LSPO is paid; unless payment is made by 11 July 2025, the appeal stands dismissed. IIB's appeal to be listed separately.
Legal Topics
Legal Services Payment Order, Hadkinson Order, Unless Order, Appeal Procedure, Enforcement of Financial Orders
Family Law Civil Procedure Legal Services Payment Order Hadkinson Order Unless Order Appeal Procedure Enforcement of Financial Orders

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 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sohail Sultan Ahmad

Defendant/appellant

IIB Group Holdings W. L. L.

Defendant/appellant

Meerna Ali Ghuloom Faraj

Applicant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (family/financial Remedy) / Case Management and Interlocutory Orders Pending Substantive Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a Hadkinson or unless order should be made to bar the husband's appeal pending payment of a legal services payment order (LSPO)
  2. 2 Whether the husband's failure to pay the LSPO is deliberate and wilful contempt
  3. 3 Whether the LSPO was properly made given the disputed existence of certain assets

Ratio Decidendi

The husband's failure to pay the LSPO is deliberate and wilful contempt. The criteria for a Hadkinson order are met: the husband is in contempt, the contempt is deliberate and continuing, it impedes the course of justice by preventing the wife from being represented, there is no other effective remedy, and the order is proportionate. The husband's appeal shall not be heard unless and until the LSPO is paid in full. An immediate unless order would be disproportionate; a Hadkinson order is the appropriate and proportionate remedy.

Court Disposition

Husband's appeal stayed unless and until LSPO is paid; unless payment is made by 11 July 2025, the appeal stands dismissed. IIB's appeal to be listed separately.

Orders

  • Husband to pay £120,000 + VAT to wife by 2 May 2025 in satisfaction of LSPO.
  • Husband's appeal not to be listed or heard unless and until LSPO is paid in full.