Shahraab Ahmad v Karim Ouajjou & Anor
| Judge | HIGH COURT JUDGE |
| Neutral Citation | [2024] EWHC 1096 (Comm) |
| Date | 29 April 2024 |
| Year | 2024 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division (Commercial Court) |
| Counsel | Mr Pickering,Kc,Mr Cogley,Mr Goldstone |
Neutral Citation Number: [2024] EWHC 1096 (Comm)
Case No: CL-2022-000139
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS OF ENGLAND AND WALES
KING’S BENCH DIVISION
COMMERCIAL COURT
Royal Courts of Justice, Rolls Building
Fetter Lane, London, EC4A 1NL
Monday, 29 April 2024
BEFORE:
DAME CLARE MOULDER DBE
HIGH COURT JUDGE (SITTING IN RETIREMENT)
----------------------
BETWEEN:
SHAHRAAB AHMAD Claimant
- and -
(1) KARIM OUAJJOU
(2) YASMIN AL SAHOUD PEREZ Defendants
----------------------
MR COGLEY, KC and MR GOLDSTONE appeared on behalf of the Claimant
MR PICKERING, KC appeared on behalf of the Defendants
----------------------
JUDGMENT
(Approved)
----------------------
Digital Transcription by Epiq Europe Ltd,
Lower Ground, 46 Chancery Lane, London WC2A 1JE
Web: www.epiqglobal.com/en-gb/ Email: civil@epiqglobal.co.uk
(Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)
This Transcript is Crown Copyright. It may not be reproduced in whole or in part other than in accordance with
relevant licence or with the express consent of the Authority. All rights are reserved.
WARNING: reporting restrictions may apply to the contents transcribed in this document, particularly if the case
concerned a sexual offence or involved a child. Reporting restrictions prohibit the publication of the applicable
information to the public or any section of the public, in writing, in a broadcast or by means of the internet, including
social media. Anyone who receives a copy of this transcript is responsible in law for making sure that applicable
restrictions are not breached. A person who breaches a reporting restriction is liable to a fine and/or imprisonment.
For guidance on whether reporting restrictions apply, and to what information, ask at the court office or take legal
advice.
Epiq Europe Ltd, Lower Ground, 46 Chancery Lane, London WC2A 1JE
www.epiqglobal.com/en-gb/
1. DAME CLARE MOULDER DBE: This is the judgment of the court on the claimant’s
contempt applications against the first defendant, Karim Ouajjou, and the second
defendant, Yasmin Al Sahoud Perez (referred to in this judgment as “D1” and “D2”
respectively). D1 and D2 have admitted breaches of the worldwide freezing orders
(“the WFO”) which were first made on an ex parte basis on 18 March 2022 and
continued by consent by order of 30 March 2022. There were two WFOs, one against
each defendant, in identical terms. The defendants accept that as a result of the
breaches, they are in contempt of court. The hearing on 25 April 2024 was therefore for
the purposes of determining the sentence for the admitted contempt.
2. At the hearing, the claimant was represented by Mr Cogley, KC and the defendants
were represented by Mr Pickering, KC. Following a full day of oral submissions, the
hearing was adjourned to 29 April 2024 for the purpose of handing down this judgment.
I have had the benefit therefore of full written and oral submissions from counsel on
both sides. The defendants, however, did not attend the hearing. In correspondence
dated 22 April 2024 from Colman Coyle Limited (“Colman Coyle”), solicitors acting
for the defendants, Colman Coyle wrote that:
“There is no order or direction requiring the defendants to attend in person at the
hearing, and particularly given that they are both resident abroad, they do not
intend to be there.
We note that you suggested that the reason why your client wishes them to be
present is so that they could be cross-examined as to their assets and in respect of
their mitigation. We do not accept that it would be proper for any such cross-
examination to take place.”
3. The court does have witness statements from the defendants in relation to the
contempts. From D1 there is a witness statement dated 27 March 2024, entitled Fifth
Witness Statement, and from D2 there are three witness statements dated
29 November 2023, 28 March 2024 and 16 April 2024, entitled Fourth, Fifth and
Eighth Witness Statements respectively. The weight to be given to those statements is
considered below.
4. It is not necessary to consider the detail of the underlying proceedings in this matter.
The relevant background to these contempt proceedings is that D1 and D2 are married,
and at the time the WFO was made, they jointly owned a property in Madrid, which
they had owned since 2015 (“the Madrid property”). As referred to above, the WFO
was first made on 18 March 2022 and was served on the defendants on or about
22 March 2022. On 30 March 2022 an order was made by consent continuing the
WFOs.
5. The WFOs contained a prohibition on disposing of or dealing with assets up to the
value of some €45.8 million in the following terms:
“Until the return date or further order of the court, the respondent must not (1)
remove from England and Wales any of his assets which are in England and
Wales up to the value of €45,891,758,47 and US$1,946,402; or (2) in any way
dispose of, deal with or diminish the value of any of his assets, whether they are
in or outside
Epiq Europe Ltd, Lower Ground, 46 Chancery Lane, London WC2A 1JE
www.epiqglobal.com/en-gb/
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting