header-logo header-logo

16 May 2014 / Helen Mulcahy , Jim Sharkey , Jim Sharkey
Issue: 7606 / Categories: Features , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Lies, lies & damned lies

web_sharkey

Jim Sharkey & Helen Mulcahy analyse a raft of recent fraud cases

Clutterbuck and Paton v Al Amoudi [2014] EWHC 383 (Ch) involved a defendant who became known in the British press as “the Vamp in the veil”. A couple sued Miss Al Amoudi, claiming that:

  1. they had transferred almost £3m to her in relation to the purchase of properties and an additional sum of almost £1m for refurbishment costs in relation to other properties; and
  2. a further six properties had been transferred to Al Amoudi at an undervalue.

In relation to both claims, the couple said this was done as part of a number of joint ventures with Al Amoudi and that they would never have entered into these joint ventures, paid over the money and transferred the properties but for certain fraudulent misrepresentations allegedly made by Al Amoudi. They said she falsely claimed to be a Saudi princess, related to the Saudi royal family by marriage, extremely rich and that she had undertaken to arrange £46m

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Martin Livingston joins Ogier in Cayman to strengthen regulatory support

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan announces 47 summer promotions across UK offices

NEWS
Consultant-led law firms should prepare for closer regulatory attention as oversight evolves
Artificial intelligence may draft workplace grievances, but employers cannot treat them any differently from conventional complaints
From dishonest claimants to judicial promotions and procedural skirmishes, the latest legal developments offer plenty for litigators to digest
Fresh guidance is set to influence how courts decide whether hearings take place online or in person
County Court judges remain divided over whether landlords can lawfully force entry to carry out essential safety inspections after tenants ignore access injunctions
back-to-top-scroll