Rasool v Paddington Company One Ltd [2021] EWHC 3633 (QB) (17 December 2021)

Rasool v Paddington Company One Ltd [2021] EWHC 3633 (QB) (17 December 2021)

The injunction was discharged due to Mr Rasool's failure to provide full and frank disclosure of prior proceedings and inconsistent claims of occupation. The possession order was granted because Mr Rasool's claim to tenancy was not genuinely disputed on substantial grounds, lacking credibility and documentary support.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] EWHC 3633 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Mohamed Ali Abbas Rasool; Respondent: Paddington Company One Limited; Claimant: Paddington Company One Limited; Defendant: Mohamed Ali Abbas Rasool; Defendant: Persons Unknown
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 December 2021
Procedural Posture
Possession Claim Against Trespassers and Application to Continue Injunction / Return Date Hearing and Cross Application for Possession Order
Outcome
Injunction discharged; possession order granted against Mr Rasool and Persons Unknown; costs ordered against Mr Rasool on indemnity basis.
Legal Topics
Injunctions, Possession Orders, Full and Frank Disclosure, Trespass, Summary Judgment, Costs
Civil Procedure Property Law Injunctions Possession Orders Full and Frank Disclosure Trespass Summary Judgment Costs

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohamed Ali Abbas Rasool

Claimant

Paddington Company One Limited

Respondent

Paddington Company One Limited

Claimant

Mohamed Ali Abbas Rasool

Defendant

Persons Unknown

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Possession Claim Against Trespassers and Application to Continue Injunction / Return Date Hearing and Cross Application for Possession Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the injunction should be continued or discharged
  2. 2 Whether a possession order should be granted against Mr Rasool as a trespasser
  3. 3 Whether Mr Rasool failed to provide full and frank disclosure

Ratio Decidendi

The injunction was discharged due to Mr Rasool's failure to provide full and frank disclosure of prior proceedings and inconsistent claims of occupation. The possession order was granted because Mr Rasool's claim to tenancy was not genuinely disputed on substantial grounds, lacking credibility and documentary support.

Court Disposition

Injunction discharged; possession order granted against Mr Rasool and Persons Unknown; costs ordered against Mr Rasool on indemnity basis.

Orders

  • Discharge of injunction granted by Julian Knowles J.
  • Possession order against Mr Rasool and Persons Unknown pursuant to CPR Part 55.