Karam Salah Al Din Awni Al Sadeq v Dechert LLP
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Mr Justice Murray |
| Judgment Date | 05 May 2021 |
| Neutral Citation | [2021] EWHC 1149 (QB) |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division |
| Docket Number | Case No. QB-2020-000322 |
| Date | 05 May 2021 |
[2021] EWHC 1149 (QB)
THE HONOURABLE Mr Justice Murray
Case No. QB-2020-000322
Case No. QB-2020-003142
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
Mr John Brisby QC, Mr Alastair Tomson and Mr Simon Paul (instructed by Stokoe Partnership Solicitors) for the Claimant in each case
Mr Craig Morrison and Mr Tom Foxton (instructed by Enyo Law LLP) for the Defendants in each case
Hearing date: 21 April 2021
Approved Judgment
I direct that copies of this version as handed down may be treated as authentic.
THE HONOURABLE Mr Justice Murray
This is a joint case management conference (“the Joint CMC”) for the claim of Mr Karam Al Sadeq against Dechert LLP (“Dechert-UK”) and three of its current or former partners, Mr Neil Gerrard, Mr David Hughes, and Ms Caroline Black ( QB-2020-000322) (“the Al Sadeq Claim”) and for the claim of Mr Jihad Quzmar against Dechert-UK and Mr Gerrard ( QB-2020-003142) (“the Quzmar Claim”). The claims have a common background and raise a number of overlapping issues. The same legal teams represent the claimant and the defendants, respectively, in each of the Al Sadeq Claim and the Quzmar Claim.
Each claimant is an individual currently detained in the Emirate of Ras Al Khaimah (“RAK”), one of the seven emirates forming part of the United Arab Emirates (“UAE”), serving sentences following conviction for criminal offences in RAK. I deal with the relationship between those convictions and these claims below.
The parties having constructively engaged and resolved most of the issues that would otherwise have been for decision at this hearing, I am required principally to determine whether there should be a joint trial of these two claims or whether they should be heard sequentially (“the Joint Trial Issue”).
By application notice dated 14 April 2021 (“the Letter of Request Application”), Mr Al Sadeq seeks the court's permission to issue a Letter of Request addressed to the UAE authorities to provide judicial assistance in the form of allowing me, as the assigned trial judge, to sit in the UAE as a Special Examiner on the days of Mr Al Sadeq's cross-examination, so that, as far as possible, he can give his evidence in cross-examination orally (having provided his evidence in chief by written witness statement in the usual way). In support of the Letter of Request Application, Mr Al Sadeq has submitted the Second Witness Statement dated 14 April 2021 of Mr Haralambos Tsiattalou, a solicitor and partner of Stokoe Partnership Solicitors (“Stokoe”), who are the solicitors for each claimant, together with a draft Letter of Request. I was asked to consider the Letter of Request Application at the Joint CMC.
The defendants do not oppose the Letter of Request Application, but in their skeleton argument for the Joint CMC raised some issues for consideration regarding the jurisdictional basis and scope of the request sought. These issues were largely resolved by inter partes discussion and agreement prior to the hearing, and a revised draft Letter of Request was provided. The application remained, of course, subject to the willingness of the court to grant it. At the hearing, having considered the submissions of the parties as to the jurisdictional basis and the terms of the Letter of Request sought, I agreed in principle that the Letter of Request should be issued.
In relation to other issues for the Joint CMC, these will be affected by my decision on the Joint Trial Issue. Subject to that:
i) it appears to be common ground that the two claims should, as far as possible, be case managed jointly, regardless of my decision on the Joint Trial Issue;
ii) in relation to the Al Sadeq Claim, the parties appear to have agreed timing of disclosure and, in principle, arrangements for the obtaining of appropriate expert evidence on Mr Al Sadeq's physical and mental health in prison;
iii) in relation to the Quzmar Claim, the parties have, I understand, largely agreed directions in relation to the scope of disclosure and scope of expert evidence, subject to conditions that it is not necessary for me to deal with expressly in this judgment;
iv) other directions to trial of the Quzmar Claim or the Joint Trial, as applicable, in relation to the timing of disclosure, witness statements and expert evidence will need to be given but are likely to be agreed.
The remainder of this judgment is concerned with the Joint Trial Issue.
Background
Mr Al Sadeq is a Jordanian citizen and a Jordanian-qualified lawyer. In November 2008 Mr Al Sadeq joined RAKIA as a legal adviser. He was promoted to Group Legal Director in 2010 and to Deputy Chief Executive Officer in June 2011. He resigned from RAKIA in late 2012, moving to Dubai in or around December 2012, where he established an investment business. He alleges that he was kidnapped in Dubai on 5 September 2014 by men acting on behalf of the Ruler and taken, without proper legal process, to RAK, where he has been detained ever since. He was subsequently tried, convicted of fraud, and sentenced to imprisonment in a number of cases in the RAK courts. He contends that he is innocent of any wrongdoing and was wrongfully convicted and imprisoned in a political trial.
Mr Quzmar is a Jordanian citizen of Palestinian origin and a Jordanian-qualified lawyer. Prior to his arrest in RAK in September 2014, he worked as a legal advisor to the Ruler and served as a judge and member of the Supreme Judicial Council of RAK. He contends that he is innocent of any wrongdoing and that he was wrongfully convicted in a judicial process that was procedurally unfair and which formed part of a wrongful campaign to harm him.
Although each claimant contends that he is innocent of the offences of which he has been convicted in RAK, each also maintains that his claim against the defendants does not require him to establish that this is so.
Dechert-UK is a limited liability partnership registered in England & Wales, with registration number OC306029, based in London, being a firm of solicitors of the Senior Courts of England and Wales, authorised and supervised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority.
Dechert-UK is part of the international network of a large and well-known law firm, operating under the business name “Dechert”, originally founded in Philadelphia, and operating there and in a number of other locations through a Pennsylvania limited liability partnership, the full legal name of which is also Dechert LLP (“Dechert-US”). References in this judgment to “Dechert” are to the international law firm as a whole. Dechert-UK is the English office of Dechert.
In June 2013 the Dubai office of Dechert, which is formally a branch of Dechert-US, was engaged by the Investment and Development Office of the Government of RAK, and later by RAK Development LLC, to assist with what the defendants say was a wide-ranging investigation concerning alleged fraud and misappropriation of public assets in relation to transactions carried out by subsidiary companies of RAKIA, allegedly committed by Dr Khater Massaad, the former Chairman and Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) of RAKIA, who has been convicted in absentia of fraud by the RAK courts (“the Investigation”).
The three individual defendants to the Al Sadeq Claim and the individual defendant to the Quzmar Claim are current or former partners (members) of Dechert-UK and solicitors of the Senior Courts of England and Wales. For present purposes, nothing turns on the fact that the engagement was accepted by the Dubai office of Dechert-US but was principally carried out by partners of Dechert-UK. It is common ground that, in respect of the allegations of each claimant, the acts of each defendant who is a private individual are attributable to Dechert-UK.
Mr Gerrard, who is a defendant in both claims, was a partner of Dechert-UK at the relevant time, having joined the firm some time in 2011 from the law firm DLA Piper. He retired as a partner of Dechert-UK on 31 December 2020. He was formerly the global co-head of Dechert's white collar and securities litigation practice. He was the lead partner for the Investigation.
Mr Hughes, who is a defendant in the Al Sadeq Claim only, is a former partner of Dechert-UK, joined Dechert-UK in mid-September 2014, and was a partner at the relevant time. According to the defendants, he first became involved in the Investigation in or around September 2015. Since about June 2017 he has been a partner at another firm of solicitors, Stewarts Law LLP.
Ms Black, who is a defendant in the Al Sadeq Claim only and may be called to give evidence as a witness in the Quzmar Claim, is a current partner of Dechert-UK. She joined Dechert-UK some time in 2011 from the law firm, DLA Piper, and was a senior associate at Dechert-UK in late 2014, becoming a partner on 1 January 2015. According to the defendants, her involvement in the Investigation decreased over time, and she had minimal involvement from the start of 2016.
Each of Mr Al Sadeq and Mr Quzmar contend that the defendants to their respective proceedings committed serious wrongs against them in the course of their work on the Investigation. These wrongs included being responsible for (i) their initial arrest and illegal abduction from their homes in the UAE; (ii) orchestrating their extended detention in unlawful and degrading...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Karam Salah Al Din Awni Al Sadeq v Dechert LLP
...Sadeq Proceedings 12 In my judgment handed down on 5 May 2021 setting out my reasons for making the May 2021 Order (neutral citation: [2021] EWHC 1149 (QB)), I summarise the background to the Al Sadeq Proceedings and the Quzmar Proceedings at [8]–[20]. I note that the hearing bundle includ......