10 - Why Us - Eastmans

Barrister M A Ajaz

Member of the Chancery Bar Association

and the Family Bar Association

Personal Message from Barrister Ajaz to All Visitors:

Our aim is to resolve your problems as soon as possible, at the lowest possible cost and assist you to see the light at the end of the tunnel.

I was Head of an Accountancy Firm for more than 20 years before I qualified as a Solicitor, then a Solicitor Advocate with Higher Rights of Audience in England & Wales and now a Barrister, of the Lincoln’s Inn London in England & Wales. My Accounting, Auditing, Taxation and Forensic Accounting experience places me in an advantageous position, when analysing financial information or financial statements of all kind of businesses, partnerships and companies. Particularly in Ancillary Relief proceedings where assets are understated and liabilities are overstated to minimise the net assets available for division. Financial Compensation claims, loss claims or any other Financial or Commercial Litigation where damages are overstated by the Claimants. Situations where business losses or liabilities are overstated to minimise the transfer price of the business, to under value  company shares to buy out minority shareholders, to transfer business assets from bankrupt companies to newly set up companies. These are some of the situations where my kind of experience can be helpful to my Clients. This kind of experience and analytical skill is very rare within the Legal Profession. The said skills can be obtained from the Accountancy Profession but this can increase legal costs and delay the proceedings.

When instructed under Direct Access, I work with you in partnership, saving you the costs of instructing a solicitor.


Some of the cases of Mr M A Ajaz:

G v G – [2016] – Representing the Defendant – Allegations of Harm, Domestic Abuse/Violence or risk of the same to the Children by the Defendant. Defendant denying the allegations and asking for Direct Contact Order. Direct Contact Order obtained by Consent for a three months period during directions hearing. Proceedings continuing to look into the allegations of Harm and Domestic Violence by the Defendant.

S v S – Contact Order – [2013] – Matter was previously being dealt with by a firm of solicitors since April 2012. We were instructed under the Direct Access Scheme during April 2013 in a Directions Hearing. We invited the Respondent to enter into mediation which was successful and a mutually agreed Consent Order was approved, signed and sealed by the Court on the same day.

K v A – Contact Order – [2013] – Defendant made serious allegations of domestic abuse and physical violence, which were partly upheld in the Magistrates Court and in the two day fact finding hearing in the County Court. Indirect contact was granted to the applicant.

C v B – Contact Order & Residence Order- [2013] – Negotiated matter successfully and achieved a favourable result for them. Contact and Residence Order granted by the Judge.

H v H – Financial Settlement – [2013] – Represented the Respondent. Terms of the Consent Order agreed out of Court along with a clean break. Consent Order signed by the Court and both parties have agreed for a clean break with an undertaking by the Applicant not to touch the pension of the Respondent.

AAK v Another – Prohibited Steps Order – (Children’s Act matter) {2012} – Representing the applicant to ask for a continuation of the Prohibited Steps Order already in place so that the children are not removed out of the jurisdiction. Ongoing.

NJO v RO – Contact and Residence Order – (Children’s Act matter) [2012] – Application to vary the Contact Order and Residence Order on the basis of allegations of serious harm carried out by the Applicant. Successfully defended the Respondent and the Court ordered mediation to increase understanding between the parties.

SK v AR – Contact Order – (Children’s Act matter) [2012] – Proceedings in relation to a Contact Order in Private Child Care Proceedings in respect of the children’s residence. Represented the Respondent and achieved his objectives.

Lombard North Central PLC v (1) EJS (2) DW [2011] – Breach of an alleged Lease Purchase Agreement. Claimant alleging breach of contract and claiming substantial damages. Representing First Defendant under the Direct Public Access Scheme. The Claimant failed to make disclosure as ordered by the Court and then settled out of Court.

ZAT v FQ and all others [2010] – Finalised the Minutes of the Memorandum of Understanding reached between the Applicant and all other Parties. All 20 or so Parties, who were spread worldwide, agreed the same and signed a Final Global Settlement.  Settlement proceeds of a six figure sum, were transferred to the Applicant by the Defendants’ solicitors in Toronto Canada.

ZAT v FQ [2010] – Represented the Applicant as an Advocate during the final hearing and approval of the Global Settlement at the High Court of Justice, Family Division, London. Consent Order for Global Financial Settlement approved by the Judge.

ZAT v FQ and All Others [2010] – Represented the Applicant in a one day International Mediation in London. The mediator present was Sir Gavin Lightman, a retired Judge of the London High Court. Two barristers from Canada and one from London participated in this mediation.

NBM v HMRC Tax Investigation [2010] – Successfully defended the Tax Investigation after a year long process of negotiations, submissions and correspondence with HMRC. HMRC was demanding around a £30,000 for tax lost and interest and penalties. Tax Payer’s liability was eliminated and they did not have to pay even a penny to the HMRC.

FQ v ZAT Statutory Demand of FQ [2010] – Represented the Respondent in Reading County Court and successfully delayed the five figure Statutory Demand of the Applicant on the basis, that the Applicant and some other Parties associated with her were judgement debtors of the Defendant.

NM v HMRC Tax Investigation [2010] – Successfully defended the Tax Investigation after a yearlong process of negotiations, submissions and correspondence with HMRC. HMRC was demanding around £80,000 for tax lost, interest and penalties. Tax Payer’s tax liability was eliminated and she did not have to pay even a penny to the HMRC.

NM v HMRC Tax Investigation [2010] – Successfully defended the Tax Investigation after a yearlong process of negotiations, submissions and correspondence with HMRC. HMRC was demanding around a £150,000 for tax lost, interest and penalties. Tax Payer’s tax liability was eliminated and he did not have to pay even a penny to the HMRC. In addition, HMRC admitted a four figure repayment due to the taxpayer but unfortunately it was time barred, as far as the client was concerned.


FQ v ZAT [2009] – Penal Notice – Drafted, served and filed a Defence to the Penal Notice on behalf of the Respondent in the High Court of Justice London, Family Division. Represented him throughout the proceedings. The other party’s representative was a senior barrister from 1 Garden Court Chambers. Partial victory in successfully claiming the reduction of Costs of the proceedings.

ZAT v FQ & KPM [2009] Chancery Division – Represented the Applicant throughout the proceedings and researched, compiled facts and legal points for an application to the Companies Court, High Court of Justice London. Worked very closely with another senior barrister, to finalise the Claim for filing in the Chancery Division. The dispute related to a minority shareholder’s allegations that the value of his shares had been reduced to nothing, and the majority shareholders had been embezzling company assets and were trying to eliminate the minority shareholder, by paying him nothing. The proceedings ended in an out of court settlement.

FQ v ZAT [2009] Family Division – Drafted, served and filed a Defence in the High Court of Justice London Family Division to the Applicant’s Application for a disproportionate Disclosure Order. I was able to claim a reduction in the Applicant’s legal costs. The Applicant was represented by a senior barrister from 1 Garden Court Chambers.

ZAT v FQ, KPM & PM [2009] Chancery Division – Drafted, served and filed an Application to the Land Adjudicator London for the cancellation of two Legal Charges registered on the title of a commercial property, to secure £550,000 for the Defendants. The proceedings ended in a settlement out of court.


FQ V ZAT [2008] Family Division – Drafted, filed and served a defence to the Applicant’s Application for a Wasted Costs Order in the High Court of Justice London Family Division. The Applicant withdrew her Application.

ZAT v FQ [2008] Third Party Debt Order – Represented the Claimant throughout the proceedings. Applied to the Reading County Court on behalf of the Applicant for an Order to the Defendant to pay a five figure sum to the Applicant from the assets she was holding on behalf of the third party. The dispute was resolved through an out of court settlement.

ZAT v FQ, KPM & PM [2008] HM Land Registry – Drafted, served and filed an Application to the Land Registrar and represented the Applicant throughout the proceedings. Applied to the Land Registry for the cancellation of a Legal Charge which secured a sum of around £550,000 on a commercial property which was partly owned by the Applicant. These proceedings were later referred to the Land Adjudicator London by the Land Registrar.

ZAT v FQ [2008] Family Division – Represented the Applicant, drafted, served and filed an Application for Ancillary Relief in the Reading County Court. Represented the Applicant throughout the proceedings.

The District Judge transferred these proceedings to the High Court of Justice London, Family Division, on the grounds they were complicated, a large number of assets were involved, many assets being overseas, and there were three to four proceedings already underway in Canada, Pakistan and Malaysia in respect of assets there.

ZAT V KQ [2008] – Drafted, served and filed an Application for Security of Costs of the Defendant, in the Reading County Court, against the Claimant who was resident in Pakistan. The application was successful. The Claim was dismissed with a costs order of about £14,500 against the Claimant.

ZAT V FQ [2008] – Acted as an Advocate of the Applicant in the Family Division of the High Courts of Justice, London against a senior barrister, Claire Heppenstall of 18 years call, from 1 Garden Court Chambers, London. Obtained a Consent Order outlining how to proceed with the worldwide litigation between the Parties and the sale of flats and plots of land in Canada.

KQ v ZAT [2008] – Drafted served and filed a Defence to this £190,000 money claim by the Claimant, in a London County Court but transferred to Reading County Court, based upon a fraudulent cheque. Acted as an Advocate of the Defendant throughout the proceedings at the Reading County Court. Claim dismissed with a nearly £14,500 costs order against the Claimant.

Civil Courts Lahore, Pakistan [2008] – Advised and guided the lawyers in Pakistan to defend criminal as well as civil proceedings against the relatives of a client going through Financial Settlement proceedings in England and Wales. Proceedings in Pakistan ended as part of a Global Settlement between the parties.

AQ v ZAT [2008] – Drafted, served and filed a Defence, in Reading Court, to this four figure Claim on behalf of the Defendant. Acted as an Advocate of the Defendant throughout the proceedings. The matter ended as a part of a Global Settlement.

TAS v SS [2008] – Drafted served and filed a Divorce Petition for the Petitioner in the Reading County Court. Represented him throughout the proceedings. Obtained a Decree absolute for her. Agreed all arrangements for children, maintenance payments for her and children, contact arrangements for children and financial settlement out of Court. Successfully resolved all issues through a Consent Order.


Mrs TSK v Mr K [2007] – Drafted served and filed in the Reading County Court a Divorce Petition on behalf of the Petitioner. Represented the Petitioner throughout the proceedings. Obtained a Decree Absolute for her. Applied for Ancillary Relief and settled all issues in the shortest possible time, saving the client money.

Mrs A v SA [2007] – Represented the Respondent in Divorce proceedings commenced by his wife in Oldham County Court. Commenced Ancillary Proceedings for him. The Wife tried to misappropriate and conceal her assets and hide them beyond jurisdiction. Obtained a five figure sum for the Respondent.

FQ & MQ v ZAT [2007] – Represented the Defendant in Canadian proceedings in respect of two plots of land worth 1.5 million Canadian dollars. Drafted and filed a Defence in the Toronto Superior Court of Justice, Toronto, Canada to avoid a Default Judgement and protect the interests of the client. This gave the client time to raise funds and instruct a Canadian solicitor. Worked very closely with the Canadian solicitors and barristers, the matter ended through a settlement out of court after a three year litigation.

ZAT v FQ [2007] – Drafted and filed a Divorce Petition on behalf the Petitioner in the Reading County Court. Represented him throughout the proceedings at the Reading County Court. Obtained a Decree Absolute for him and made an application for Ancillary Relief for him.

Mr C v DAM [2007] – Represented the Defendant, in the Reading County Court, who was a scaffolding contractor and was being sued by a concrete mixer lorry operator and driver. The allegations were the Defendant’s lorry driver was responsible for an accident which damaged the lorry of Claimant on a High Way. The Claim was dismissed.


Mr MC V Mrs RC [2006] – Represented the Respondent in the Basingstoke County Court. Contested the Divorce Petition on the basis the allegations were false. Drafted, filed and served an application for Ancillary Relief. Successfully obtained a court order against the Petitioner to pay the Respondent a five figure sum and she shall retain a large residential plot of land in Ghana.


Mr HAS v Mrs S [2005] – Drafted and filed a Divorce Petition on behalf the Petitioner at Reading County Court. Obtained a Decree Absolute for her. Represented the Petitioner throughout the proceedings. Agreed maintenance payments, arrangements for contact with the children and financial issues through agreement and Consent Order.


Mrs JG v Mr BC [2004] – Represented the Defendant, who was a builder, in connection with a construction dispute. The matter was successfully settled out of court.


A National Finance Company v NM [2003] – The Claimant’s Claim, in the Reading County Court, was struck off during the hearing of preliminary issues on the basis that there was no enforceable contract between the Claimant and Defendant. The Judge ruled the Hire Purchase Contract, involving a six figure sum, was invalid. The Court further ordered the Claimant not to commence any new proceedings, regarding the same Claim without the prior permission of the court.

JCM v Miss K [2003] – Drafted and filed a Money Claim at the Reading County Court on behalf of the Claimant to recover a five figure sum from the Defendant. The Defendant paid most of the Claim before the hearing of the Claim.

Mrs MAB v Mr B [2003] – Drafted and filed a Divorce Petition at Reading County Court on behalf of the Petitioner. Represented her throughout the proceedings, obtained a Decree Absolute. Agreed the financial settlement out of Court.

Mrs NMG v Mr G [2003] – Drafted and filed a Divorce Petition on behalf of the Petitioner in the Reading County Court. Obtained a Decree Absolute. Agreed the financial settlement and arrangements for children out of Court.

Mrs MKG v Land Registry [2003] – Represented the Client in an Inheritance matter and winding up of her husband’s estate.

NS v A Tenant [2003] – Applied to the Reading County Court for the eviction of an unsecured tenant. Represent the Landlord throughout the proceedings successfully obtained a court order against the tenant to leave the property within 30 days.

Mrs MR V Mr A [2003] – Represented the Claimant in the Brentford County Court and challenged the will of her   Deceased Partner under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975. The Claimant rejected an offer of a five figure sum 20 minutes before the two day hearing before a Circuit Judge. The Claimant was over 80 years old, suffering from dementia, and could not recall many facts before the Court during cross examination. The Claimant’s brother became a hostile witness shortly before the trial.  The claim was rejected but the Claimant’s claim for pension rights on the basis of her deceased Partner’s contribution was successful. The Claimant did not have to pay her opponent’s legal costs.


Dr AACQ v Mr L & Mrs L Mortgages/ Partnership/ FSA (Mediation) [2002] –   Represented the Claimant against a bank in London  to reverse the further advances made by the bank to the Defendants, without the knowledge of the Claimant, secured on a property given as a security by the Claimant to the bank. Demanded partnership accounts and details of missing partnership
assets.

DAM v Denham Construction (Mediation) [2002] – Served a notice on the Defendants on the basis that they exposed the Claimant to asbestos dust, when he supplied safety net services to them during the renovation of a railway station in London. The notice demanded the defendants must pay for the future health monitoring costs of the Claimant.

N S v A Tenant [2002] – Successfully represented the Claimant Landlord in the Reading County Court for the eviction of the Defendant, a Secured Tenant, on the basis of non-payment of rent and misuse of the property by storing dangerous chemicals at the property.

BA v Broadband International Services (Mediation) [2002] – Represent the Claimant for a five figure debt collection from the Defendants for professional services he rendered to them.

Customs & Excise v RC [2002] – Drafted and filed a defence against a Statutory Demand served by the Customs Excise on the Defendant, in respect of monies owed by his company to the Customs and Excise, in respect of VAT.

Rover Group v City and London International Limited (Mediation) [2002]
Represented the Defendant and put up a successful defence that most of the cars supplied by the Claimant to the Defendant’s fleet were defective and they were not entitled to the full price of the cars supplied. Out of court settlement was reached in which, the Claimant accepted about 10% of his original demand. Each party paid their own costs.

DW & Mrs E v AMD [2002] – Represented the Defendant at Basingstoke County Court who was a professional wedding photographer, facing a substantial negligence claim. The allegations were, he took out of focus photographs and made a poor quality video of the Claimant’s wedding. The Claimants were demanding a five figure sum to re-schedule the wedding, in order to produce a professional quality wedding video and photographs of their marriage. After a four hour hearing, the District Judge gave the Parties 30 minutes to reach a compromise if they could. During this interval the Claimants accepted the Defendant’s six month old original compensation offer of £100 and an offer of for free improvement of  their digital wedding photographs where possible.


NAR v BJ Limited [2001] – Represented the Claimant at Reading Employment Tribunal who claimed that he was unfairly dismissed by the Defendant. The Claimant rejected a four figure sum of compensation 15 minutes before the hearing. After a full day trial, the Claimant eventually lost his claim before a three member Employment Tribunal. The Defendant’s claim for his legal costs was successfully defended and criminal proceedings against him for lying before the Tribunal and misleading the Tribunal were dismissed.