Ahmed v Director General of Security Service & Ors

Ahmed v Director General of Security Service & Ors

The civil claim is a collateral attack on findings made by the criminal courts, specifically the absence of complicity by UK authorities in the Claimant's alleged torture and ill-treatment. Permitting the civil claim to proceed would bring the administration of justice into disrepute. The fresh evidence relied upon does not transform the case or justify relitigation under the Phosphate Sewage test.

Parties
Claimant: Rangzieb Ahmed; Defendant: Director General of Security Service; Defendant: Chief of the Secret Intelligence Service; Defendant: Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs; Defendant: Secretary of State for the Home Department; Defendant: Her Majesty's Attorney-General; Defendant: Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil / Application to Strike Out Statement of Case (abuse of Process)
Outcome
Claim struck out as abuse of process; judgment for all Defendants.
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Collateral Attack on Conviction, Complicity in Torture, False Imprisonment, Assault and Battery, Misfeasance in Public Office, Negligence, Conspiracy, Human Rights Act 1998, European Convention on Human Rights
Civil Procedure Human Rights Tort Law Criminal Law Abuse of Process Collateral Attack on Conviction Complicity in Torture False Imprisonment +6 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 4 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rangzieb Ahmed

Claimant

Director General of Security Service

Defendant

Chief of the Secret Intelligence Service

Defendant

Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs

Defendant

Secretary of State for the Home Department

Defendant

Her Majesty's Attorney-General

Defendant

Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Application to Strike Out Statement of Case (abuse of Process)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the civil claim amounts to an impermissible collateral attack on previous criminal court decisions under the Hunter principle
  2. 2 Whether fresh evidence transforms the case to justify relitigation
  3. 3 Whether the Defendants were complicit in the Claimant's alleged torture and ill-treatment in Pakistan

Ratio Decidendi

The civil claim is a collateral attack on findings made by the criminal courts, specifically the absence of complicity by UK authorities in the Claimant's alleged torture and ill-treatment. Permitting the civil claim to proceed would bring the administration of justice into disrepute. The fresh evidence relied upon does not transform the case or justify relitigation under the Phosphate Sewage test.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out as abuse of process; judgment for all Defendants.

Orders

  • The Claimant’s Statement of Case is struck out as an abuse of process.
  • Judgment for all six Defendants against the Claimant.