Ishtiaq Baig v Zoheb Hassan

Ishtiaq Baig v Zoheb Hassan

Service by posting to defendant's registered address as director was valid under Companies Act section 1140, but defendant was not resident or domiciled in UK at relevant time and England was not clearly the most appropriate forum; thus, court has no jurisdiction under Defamation Act section 9.

Parties
Claimant: Ishtiaq Baig; Defendant: Zoheb Hassan
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 April 2025
Procedural Posture
Defamation / Ruling on Jurisdictional Challenge
Outcome
defendant's application granted; claim struck out for want of jurisdiction
Legal Topics
Service of Process, Jurisdiction, Forum Non Conveniens, Companies Act Section 1140, Defamation Act Section 9
Civil Procedure Defamation Company Law Service of Process Jurisdiction Forum Non Conveniens Companies Act Section 1140 Defamation Act Section 9

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

Parties

Ishtiaq Baig

Claimant

Zoheb Hassan

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation / Ruling on Jurisdictional Challenge

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether service of claim form was valid under CPR and Companies Act section 1140
  2. 2 Whether English court has jurisdiction under Defamation Act section 9
  3. 3 Whether England is clearly the most appropriate forum for the claim

Ratio Decidendi

Service by posting to defendant's registered address as director was valid under Companies Act section 1140, but defendant was not resident or domiciled in UK at relevant time and England was not clearly the most appropriate forum; thus, court has no jurisdiction under Defamation Act section 9.

Court Disposition

defendant's application granted; claim struck out for want of jurisdiction

Orders

  • Claim form set aside
  • Interim extension of time to appeal granted