Karbhari & Anor v Ahmed [2013] EWHC 4042 (QB) (17 December 2013)

The defendant's deliberate and serious procedural default, including contradictory statements and late evidence without good reason, constituted an abuse of process and justified striking out the defence under CPR 3.4(2).

Citation: [2013] EWHC 4042 (QB)
Parties: Claimant: Mr Aiyub Karbhari; Claimant: Mr Naeem Karbhari; Defendant: Mr Ilyas Ahmed
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 17 December 2013
Procedural Posture: Civil Claim for Repayment of Monies Advanced / Interlocutory Judgment on Procedural Applications at Trial
Outcome: Defence struck out; judgment for claimants; execution stayed pending investigation.
Legal Topics: Relief From Sanctions, Late Witness Statements, Striking Out Defence, Money Laundering Concerns

Civil Procedure Contract Law Relief From Sanctions Late Witness Statements Striking Out Defence Money Laundering Concerns

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

Mr Aiyub Karbhari

Claimant

Mr Naeem Karbhari

Claimant

Mr Ilyas Ahmed

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Claim for Repayment of Monies Advanced / Interlocutory Judgment on Procedural Applications at Trial

Legal Issues

1 Whether to permit late service of supplementary witness statement and amended defence
2 Whether to strike out the defence for procedural abuse

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Defence struck out; judgment for claimants; execution stayed pending investigation.

Orders

Defence struck out under CPR 3.4(2)
Judgment entered for claimants