Seema Ashraf v Attarian & Ors

Seema Ashraf v Attarian & Ors

The claimant's repeated and unexplained changes to her pleaded case, contradictory statements of truth, and failure to provide any evidential basis for the factual assertions amounted to an abuse of process. The proceedings were not prosecuted in an ordinary, reasonable manner, and it would be unfair and disproportionate to allow them to continue. The only appropriate response was to strike out the statement of case and dismiss the claim.

Parties
Claimant: Seema Ashraf (Executrix of the estate of Syed Ul Haq, Deceased); Defendant: Lester Dominic Solicitors (a Firm); Defendant: Mr L Kan; Defendant: Mr Attarian; Defendant: Mr B Nijjar and Mrs S Nijjar; Defendant: Chief Land Registrar; Defendant: Bank of Scotland PLC; Defendant: Rees Page (A Firm)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil (chancery Division) / Application to Strike Out And/or for Reverse Summary Judgment
Outcome
Claim struck out as an abuse of process; claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Land Registration Indemnity, Rectification of Register, Summary Judgment, Pleading Requirements
Civil Procedure Land Law Abuse of Process Land Registration Indemnity Rectification of Register Summary Judgment Pleading Requirements

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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Seema Ashraf (Executrix of the estate of Syed Ul Haq, Deceased)

Claimant

Lester Dominic Solicitors (a Firm)

Defendant

Mr L Kan

Defendant

Mr Attarian

Defendant

Mr B Nijjar and Mrs S Nijjar

Defendant

Chief Land Registrar

Defendant

Bank of Scotland PLC

Defendant

Rees Page (A Firm)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (chancery Division) / Application to Strike Out And/or for Reverse Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's statement of case should be struck out as an abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether the claim discloses reasonable grounds for bringing the claim
  3. 3 Whether the claim for indemnity under the Land Registration Act 2002 can succeed given the pleaded facts

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant's repeated and unexplained changes to her pleaded case, contradictory statements of truth, and failure to provide any evidential basis for the factual assertions amounted to an abuse of process. The proceedings were not prosecuted in an ordinary, reasonable manner, and it would be unfair and disproportionate to allow them to continue. The only appropriate response was to strike out the statement of case and dismiss the claim.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out as an abuse of process; claim dismissed

Orders

  • Claimant's statement of case struck out
  • Claim against the Chief Land Registrar dismissed