Faraj v Ahmad and Anr [2026] EWCA Civ 962

In a highly unusual case, the Court of Appeal has allowed the appeals of both the husband (represented by James Weale KC with Deborah Bangay KC) and a Bahraini investment bank, IIB Group Holdings WLL (represented by Giles Richardson KC and Jamie Randall) on the grounds of, respectively, procedural unfairness and a lack of jurisdiction.

Following a two week trial, the first instance judge (Sir Jonathan Cohen) made a finding that the husband had access to a bank account containing £16m and, on that basis, ordered the husband to make a lump sum payment of over £6m. However, no case to that effect was ever put to the husband in cross-examination. On that basis, the Court of Appeal concluded that the trial was procedurally unfair.

In addition, the first instance judge ordered the bank to make housing provision for the wife in circumstances where the bank had indicated its willingness to do so in principle, but never concluded a binding agreement to that effect. The Court of Appeal overturned that order, holding that there was no jurisdiction to compel a third party with an interest in a property to make provision for one or other of the spouses.

The Court of Appeal’s judgment gives important guidance on the procedure to be adopted where specific property claims are advanced in matrimonial proceedings. The matter has been remitted back to the High Court for a re-trial.

A copy of the Judgment can be downloaded here.