Box Legal Logo

Box Legal Logo
Home > ATE Caselaw > Ul-Haq v Shah (2009)

Ul-Haq v Shah (2009)

Ul-Haq v Shah (2009)

Court of Appeal
Date: 09/06/09

The Issues: At first instance the Recorder decided that:

(a) The Claimant had conspired with his mother to support her fraudulent claim.

(b) The Claimant had however genuinely suffered minor personal injuries and should be awarded the normal minor damages.

(c) He would not strike out the Claimant’s claim under CPR3.4(2), (which provides that the court may strike out a statement of case if it appears that the statement of case is an abuse of process).

(d) The Claimant should pay two thirds of the Defendant’s costs.

Deducting the costs awarded against him from his damages meant that the Claimant ended up slightly out of pocket, but it was the Defendant who appealed, and asked the Court of Appeal to consider whether it is possible, under CPR 3.4(2) or at all, to strike out a genuine claim on the ground that the claimant had been involved in a fraud on the Court.

Please sign in to have access to the full report.

Caselaw Sign In  

If you're new here, this will guide you through creating an account. If you're already a member, simply enter your existing credentials to log in.

< Back to case list

We use cookies to improve your experience of our website. Click here to read more.