Baljit Singh Bhandal v His Majesty's Revenue & Customs & Anor

Baljit Singh Bhandal v His Majesty's Revenue & Customs & Anor

The claimant failed to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that the warrant of arrest and supporting information were forgeries or that any fraud was perpetrated by the defendants. The evidence, including the signature of the magistrate and the surrounding documentation, supported the genuineness of the warrant. Even if fraud had been established, the proceedings would have been dismissed as an abuse of process because the claimant had previously elected not to pursue the forgery case and instead proceeded on the basis that the warrant was genuine in earlier litigation. The claims were therefore dismissed.

Parties
Claimant: Baljit Singh Bhandal; First Defendant: His Majesty’s Revenue & Customs; Second Defendant: Stephen Frederick Broad
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 June 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment After Full Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Setting Aside Judgments for Fraud, Abuse of Process, Forgery, Criminal Procedure, Restraint Orders, Compensation Under Criminal Justice Act 1988
Civil Procedure Fraud Judicial Review Setting Aside Judgments for Fraud Abuse of Process Forgery Criminal Procedure Restraint Orders +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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Baljit Singh Bhandal

Claimant

His Majesty’s Revenue & Customs

First Defendant

Stephen Frederick Broad

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment After Full Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the warrant of arrest issued on 18 July 2001 was a forgery
  2. 2 Whether previous court orders and judgments were procured by fraud
  3. 3 Whether the proceedings are an abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that the warrant of arrest and supporting information were forgeries or that any fraud was perpetrated by the defendants. The evidence, including the signature of the magistrate and the surrounding documentation, supported the genuineness of the warrant. Even if fraud had been established, the proceedings would have been dismissed as an abuse of process because the claimant had previously elected not to pursue the forgery case and instead proceeded on the basis that the warrant was genuine in earlier litigation. The claims were therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • All claims by the claimant are dismissed.