Raja v Van Hoogstraten & Ors

Raja v Van Hoogstraten & Ors

The Defendants are not liable for trespass or conversion because, although the Amended Writ and December 13th Order were obtained irregularly and would have been set aside on prompt application, Tombstone deliberately delayed and acquiesced, making its application an abuse of process. Further, no actionable trespass or conversion was established on the facts.

Parties
Claimant: Asgar Sabir Raja (representing the estate of the late Mohammed Sabir Raja); Defendant: Nicholas van Hoogstraten; Intervenor: Tombstone Limited; Additional Defendant to the Sequestration Claim (no 9): Healys (A Firm)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 July 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment on Liability for Claims in Trespass and Conversion (section G Claims) Following Remittal From Court of Appeal
Outcome
All claims against Healys and the Section G Claims against the Estate are dismissed.
Legal Topics
Sequestration, Trespass, Conversion, Without Notice Applications, Abuse of Process, Irregularity in Court Orders
Civil Procedure Tort Contempt of Court Sequestration Trespass Conversion Without Notice Applications Abuse of Process +1 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 5 Authorities cited 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Asgar Sabir Raja (representing the estate of the late Mohammed Sabir Raja)

Claimant

Nicholas van Hoogstraten

Defendant

Tombstone Limited

Intervenor

Healys (A Firm)

Additional Defendant to the Sequestration Claim (no 9)

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment on Liability for Claims in Trespass and Conversion (section G Claims) Following Remittal From Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defendants (the Estate and Healys) are liable for trespass and conversion by Sequestrators acting under an irregularly obtained Amended Writ of Sequestration against Tombstone's assets
  2. 2 Whether the Amended Writ and December 13th Order were nullities or irregularly obtained and if so, whether the Defendants lose protection from liability
  3. 3 Whether Tombstone is entitled to damages for alleged trespass and conversion

Ratio Decidendi

The Defendants are not liable for trespass or conversion because, although the Amended Writ and December 13th Order were obtained irregularly and would have been set aside on prompt application, Tombstone deliberately delayed and acquiesced, making its application an abuse of process. Further, no actionable trespass or conversion was established on the facts.

Court Disposition

All claims against Healys and the Section G Claims against the Estate are dismissed.

Orders

  • All claims against Healys dismissed.
  • Section G Claims against the Estate dismissed.