UK Insurance Limited v Bahader Hassankhail

UK Insurance Limited v Bahader Hassankhail

The court found a prima facie case on the balance of probabilities that Mr Hassankhail's conduct fell within the iniquity exception, justifying orders for specific disclosure of documents relating to his finances, capacity, and the procurement of false evidence. The court also found that privilege had been waived by...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: UK Insurance Limited; Defendant: Mr Bahader Hassankhail
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 May 2026
Procedural Posture
Civil Insurance/fraud / Interlocutory Application for Specific Disclosure
Outcome
Applications for specific disclosure allowed in part and refused in part.
Legal Topics
Legal Professional Privilege, Iniquity Exception, Waiver of Privilege, Specific Disclosure, Abuse of Process
Civil Procedure Insurance Law Fraud Legal Professional Privilege Iniquity Exception Waiver of Privilege Specific Disclosure Abuse of Process

Source-derived case record

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

Parties

UK Insurance Limited

Claimant

Mr Bahader Hassankhail

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Insurance/fraud / Interlocutory Application for Specific Disclosure

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the iniquity exception to privilege applies to documents sought by UKIL
  2. 2 Whether UKIL or Mr Hassankhail have waived privilege over certain documents
  3. 3 Whether specific disclosure should be ordered for the categories sought by each party

Ratio Decidendi

The court found a prima facie case on the balance of probabilities that Mr Hassankhail's conduct fell within the iniquity exception, justifying orders for specific disclosure of documents relating to his finances, capacity, and the procurement of false evidence. The court also found that privilege had been waived by both parties in respect of certain categories of documents, and ordered disclosure accordingly. The court refused disclosure of documents where privilege had not been waived or where the request was disproportionate or irrelevant.

Court Disposition

Applications for specific disclosure allowed in part and refused in part.

Orders

  • Mr Hassankhail to disclose documents relating to use of funds, procurement of Mansour 1, instructions and advice for the approval hearing, medical and rehabilitation records, travel documents, tenancy agreement, COP3 and supporting documents, and driving test certificates.
  • UKIL to disclose all communications between Mr Mansour and UKIL prior to 29 June 2022, and internal/external correspondence and advice relating to Mansour 1 and the settlement, within the specified date range.