0370 270 6000

Begum v Yousaf

29 January 2002
The issues

Striking out – non-compliance of Court Order – decline of witnesses memories.

The facts

This was a property dispute relating to an alleged transfer of property which had occurred in 1994. The action had been commenced in September 1998. Judgment had been entered in default but subsequently set aside in November 1999. On the 10th January 2000 a Directions Order had been made including a Direction that the matter be set down within 28 days. The Claimant did not comply. On the 11th December 2000 the matter went back before the Judge. The Judge had indicated that this was a stale case. He had made this observation at the earlier Hearing and that it should proceed as quickly as possible. He struck it out.

The Claimant appealed.

The decision

The Claimant’s investigations had been complete by February 2000.

It was unlikely to come to Trial for 8 years after the transfer of property. It turned on the recollection of witnesses. That recollection was likely to be diminished by time.

The Judge’s Order was not disproportionate – Appeal dismissed.

Focus on...

Legal updates

Court of Appeal confirms exclusive English jurisdiction clause in excess liability policies in Canadian pipeline dispute

On 10 June 2022 the Court of Appeal upheld an anti-suit injunction granted in favour of insurers by Mr Justice Jacobs in September 2021 restraining proceedings from being brought in Canada and enforcing the exclusive English jurisdiction clause in excess liability policies.



Payment Fraud landscape shaped by technology in 2021

Payment systems across Europe are under increased pressure to mitigate fraud risks and defend against persistent attacks from enablers using ever more sophisticated and malicious viruses and malware.


Legal updates

Gosden and another v Halliwell Landau and another [2021] EWHC 159 (Comm)

This claim addressed the question, of when the date for assessment of damages in cases of negligence should be determined and shows that when appropriate the Courts will depart from the default position.


Legal updates

Assessing the scope of employers liability – Chell v Tarmac

These were the opening remarks of Mr Justice Martin Spencer when handing down his Judgment in the recent case of Andrew Chell v Tarmac Cement and Lime Limited [2020] EWHC 2613, the latest in a series of appeals dealing with the scope of vicarious liability.


The content on this page is provided for the purposes of general interest and information. It contains only brief summaries of aspects of the subject matter and does not provide comprehensive statements of the law. It does not constitute legal advice and does not provide a substitute for it.

Mailing list sign up

Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.

Sign up