Ghenavat & Ors v Lyons [2023] EWHC 2428 (KB) (03 October 2023)

Ghenavat & Ors v Lyons [2023] EWHC 2428 (KB) (03 October 2023)

The defendant's conduct, comprising repeated abusive, threatening, and defamatory communications to the claimants and third parties, the creation of fake email accounts and domains, and impersonation, amounted to a course of conduct that a reasonable person would consider harassment under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. The defendant knew or ought to have known his conduct would cause alarm or distress. No statutory defence or justification applied. The claimants are entitled to a permanent injunction.

Citation
[2023] EWHC 2428 (KB)
Parties
Claimant: Farid Alizadeh Ghenavat; Claimant: Andrew David Rahamim; Claimant: Michael Minashi Rehamim; Defendant: Simon Henry Lyons
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 October 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Harassment (protection From Harassment Act 1997) / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Permanent injunction granted against the defendant under s.3A of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.
Legal Topics
Harassment, Injunctive Relief, Company Law, Shareholder Disputes
Civil Law Tort Law Harassment Injunctive Relief Company Law Shareholder Disputes

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

Parties

Farid Alizadeh Ghenavat

Claimant

Andrew David Rahamim

Claimant

Michael Minashi Rehamim

Claimant

Simon Henry Lyons

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Harassment (protection From Harassment Act 1997) / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant's course of conduct amounted to harassment under s.1 and s.3A of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997
  2. 2 Whether the defendant knew or ought to have known his conduct amounted to harassment
  3. 3 Whether any statutory defence or justification applied to the defendant's conduct

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant's conduct, comprising repeated abusive, threatening, and defamatory communications to the claimants and third parties, the creation of fake email accounts and domains, and impersonation, amounted to a course of conduct that a reasonable person would consider harassment under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. The defendant knew or ought to have known his conduct would cause alarm or distress. No statutory defence or justification applied. The claimants are entitled to a permanent injunction.

Court Disposition

Permanent injunction granted against the defendant under s.3A of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.

Orders

  • The defendant is restrained from pursuing any course of conduct amounting to harassment of the claimants.
  • The defendant is prohibited from contacting the claimants directly or indirectly, except through legal representatives or as permitted by court order.