A leaseholder instructed Iqbal to reverse a vesting order made in favour of a company, which placed a part of the freehold land into the company. The leaseholder was supported by most of the 12 leaseholders of this small development. This was a complicated dispute involving the operation of property and company law. Iqbal was instructed to give advice, draft statements and attend hearings.

Iqbal was instructed by NH who claimed that she had a beneficial interest of her home, which was in the name of her ex-husband. NH was not legally married in English law but was married under Islamic Law (a Nikkah) only. As this was not recognised in English law, NH pursued a claim in property law based on an oral agreement between her and her husband prior to marriage. This case lasted 2 years and the trial was 5 days. As with all clients, when direct access was no longer suitable, Iqbal worked with NH to instruct a solicitor to assist her due to the scale of the case (trial bundle was over 3,000 pages).

Iqbal was instructed to defend a client who was being sued for over £300,000 of unpaid loans. Iqbal was instructed only a week before the 4 day trial. The trial bundle was over 2,000 pages and Iqbal prepared the case and defended the client. The client had offered £25,000k to settle. Iqbal managed to reduce the judgment down to £20,000, which represented a huge win as the claimant had spent £100,000 on her claim and made only a partial recovery on her costs and less than 10% of her claim.

A senior employee, IM, in a large charity gave notice to his employer, having found new work with another charity. The employer threatened to obtain an injunction from the High Court to stop the employee working with his new employer. Iqbal was instructed to advise IM and draft letters of reply to the employer’s solicitors. As a result, no application was made and IM began work with his new employer.

FM, a company, instructed Iqbal to defend a claim brought by one of its franchisees, alleging breach of the franchise agreement. Iqbal advised the franchise company and attended trial. The claim was dismissed and other franchisees, who attended court to see what would happen, then decided against bringing claims.

A commercial tenant instructed Iqbal on Friday after he had been evicted from his warehouse that morning. Iqbal advised the client and prepared papers for the hearing of an urgent injunction to allow the tenant back into the property. Iqbal’s clerks arranged a hearing in the High Court on the following Monday and the injunction was granted. Subsequently, Iqbal was instructed to come to an agreement with the landlord.

Iqbal was instructed by a client who owned a large portfolio of properties, some 20 plus units, who sued his letting agent for breach of contract and negligence. Iqbal drafted the Particulars and attended the trial which lasted 13 days. The client won and recovered all their fees (which, under direct access, were about a third of the Defendant’s). The client then instructed Iqbal again to advise on and draft a multimillion pound fraud claim against a business partner to be brought in England, served in a defendant in Germany.

Iqbal was instructed by the partners in a dispute involving the terms of the partnership and the expulsion of one partner. Iqbal gave advice in conference and proposed different strategies for obtaining the outcome required.

Iqbal was instructed by professional who was being sued by a potential buyer, who claimed that the description of the property was “fraudulent.” Iqbal advised the client and drafted particulars of claim. Iqbal also advised the settlement strategies and the value of proceeding to trial compared to the kind of sum appropriate for settlement.

Iqbal was repeatedly instructed by a client who had claims made against him by lenders. Iqbal advised on the merits of defending the claims and also drafted letters offering settlements as well as a defence under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. Iqbal was successful in having one of the claims struck out on technical grounds.