MESHARY ALENEZY v SHERGROUP LIMITED & Anor

MESHARY ALENEZY v SHERGROUP LIMITED & Anor

The Defendants unlawfully seized and retained the Claimant's vehicle in breach of Paragraph 10 of Schedule 12, failed to comply with pre-action and court order requirements, and manufactured a dispute to gain leverage. Paragraph 60 and CPR Part 85 applied to the proceedings, and the Claimant substantially complied with procedural requirements. The Defendants' conduct justified costs on an indemnity basis up to 4 March and on a standard basis thereafter.

Parties
Claimant: Meshary Alenezy; First Defendant: Shergroup Limited; Second Defendant: Mr Mark Willsher
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 April 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil / Return Date Hearing Following Interim Injunction
Outcome
Costs awarded to Claimant; injunction discharged as complied with.
Legal Topics
Third Party Claims to Controlled Goods, Wrongful Seizure, Costs, Court Procedure Rules, Injunctions
Civil Procedure Enforcement Law Tort Third Party Claims to Controlled Goods Wrongful Seizure Costs Court Procedure Rules Injunctions

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Meshary Alenezy

Claimant

Shergroup Limited

First Defendant

Mr Mark Willsher

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Return Date Hearing Following Interim Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether enforcement agents acted unlawfully in seizing and retaining a vehicle belonging to a third party
  2. 2 Whether CPR Part 85 and Paragraph 60 of Schedule 12 to the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 applied
  3. 3 Who should bear the costs of proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The Defendants unlawfully seized and retained the Claimant's vehicle in breach of Paragraph 10 of Schedule 12, failed to comply with pre-action and court order requirements, and manufactured a dispute to gain leverage. Paragraph 60 and CPR Part 85 applied to the proceedings, and the Claimant substantially complied with procedural requirements. The Defendants' conduct justified costs on an indemnity basis up to 4 March and on a standard basis thereafter.

Court Disposition

Costs awarded to Claimant; injunction discharged as complied with.

Orders

  • Costs on an indemnity basis against Defendants up to and including 4 March.
  • Costs on a standard basis against Defendants from and including 5 March.