Year of call: 2013
Farhan has a busy, multi-disciplinary practice with expertise in commercial litigation, property, wills, trusts, immigration, human rights, and public law. Farhan has extensive experience in cases ranging from the lower courts to the Court of Appeal.
Property, Chancery & Commercial
Farhan is frequently instructed in a broad range of civil and commercial disputes. Farhan has a pro-active hands-on approach and can see matters right from inception, at the pre-action stage, through to trial, as well as dealing with consequential matters such as enforcement and costs challenges. He has a very pragmatic approach and, where appropriate, will advise on and conduct alternative forms of dispute resolution such as mediation.
Farhan has a substantial and wide-ranging property practice that encompasses all aspects of real property litigation and advice. He also has expertise in wills, probate, trusts, and inheritance matters.
Some of the types of cases Farhan has experience in include: co-ownership and ToLATA claims; disputes as to the substantial and procedural validity of wills; applications for the removal of executors and trustees; breach of trust/breach of fiduciary duty claims; estoppel claims; undue influence and constructive trust claims; freezing orders; high-value contractual disputes; company related disputes; partnership and shareholder disputes; charity disputes; professional negligence claims; and challenging costs decisions either on appeal or at detailed assessment proceedings.
Immigration, Human Rights and Public Law
Farhan’s diverse public law and human rights practice covers police, prisons, immigration, EU Law, and the ECHR. He is regularly instructed to draft pleadings for judicial review claims and injunctions.
Farhan has expertise in all aspects of immigration work for both private individuals and businesses. He has considerable experience in working with vulnerable clients, including those who lack the capacity to give evidence or conduct proceedings.
Farhan’s immigration practice covers appeals, points-based system applications, EU free movement legislation, entrepreneur visas, Brexit, immigration detention, deportation, illegal working, and British citizenship.
Direct Access and Conducting Litigation
In addition to accepting instructions in the usual manner through solicitors, Farhan is qualified under the Bar Standards Board Public Access Scheme and is also authorised to conduct litigation directly for members of the public. This means lay clients can instruct Farhan to deal with their cases directly without using another professional, and unlike most other lawyers, Farhan is able to deal with nearly all aspects of a case himself from start to finish, in addition to providing specialist advocacy before the courts.
For example, Farhan can file documents at court, correspond directly with opposing parties, and then represent you at trial. This saves clients from having to use two different lawyers to deal with a case, traditionally a solicitor as well as a barrister, and provides significant time and costs savings to clients.
It also means that Farhan is able to provide a better-quality service to clients that instruct him through solicitors, as he is familiar with procedural issues that may arise through the life of a case. To instruct Farhan contact one of his clerks today at [email protected].
FSV Freeholders V SGL1 Ltd  EWHC 3336 (Ch) – Successful appeal in the High Court concerning the right to buy in respect of a large block of flats in a failed property development scheme.”
Paling v Ipswich Magistrates Court & Anor  EWHC 2739 (Admin) – Farhan was successful in setting aside a liability order made by Ipswich Magistrates Court, on the basis of unfairness and apparent bias. The application for judicial review was allowed and the matter remitted back to the Magistrates Court to be heard by a differently constituted bench of judges.
R (X and others) v Secretary of State for the Home Department  EWCA Civ 1480 – A case of significance important in which the Court of Appeal held that the Home Office has an implied power to delay decision making pending a criminal investigation by a different government body, whilst noting that the exercise of the power to delay must be exercised rationally.
Ullah V Ullah – F10CL410 – Farhan is currently instructed in a large multi-million-pound claim in the business and property court involving very complex claims for breaches of trust, dishonest assistance, and self-dealing.
SK V HM – GPT-2020-000663 – Farhan is currently instructed in respect of an estate worth over £10 million, with a challenge to the validity of 4 wills due to concerns of undue influence.
Din v Aslam – PT-2019-0008843 – Instructed in respect of a claim for delivery up of estate assets from a personal representative, where a freezing order was also granted due to a risk of dissipation with the Defendant being in a foreign jurisdiction.
SS v HP QB-2020-002502 – Instructed in respect of a professional negligence claim against an immigration advisor.
RFM, N M, I B M (A MINOR) V SSHD HU/12528/2019 – successful appeal to the Upper Tribunal concerning the application of MK V SSHD  EWHC 1365 (Admin), where the court found a child born to Indian national parents, who had not been registered with the Indian High Commission, was stateless and therefore entitled to leave to remain with reference to paragraph 276ADE of the Immigration Rules.
The Queen on the application of X and others v SSHD JR/6956/2017– The case involved very novel points of law. The Upper Tribunal was asked to declare whether the SSHD has an implied power to delay decision making, for an unspecified period of time, where an applicant is under investigation for alleged offences by HMRC, even where there is no published guidance on the matter.
R (on the application of RH) v Secretary of State for Justice CO/1757/2020 – Farhan was instructed by a prisoner challenging the lawfulness of his ongoing detention, due to his various underlying health conditions, in light of the Covid-19 pandemic. The client was released early from prison on special licence after instituting judicial review proceedings.
R (Khan and others) V Secretary of State for Health CO/1708/2021 – Farhan was instructed to challenge the lawfulness of the “red list” hotel quarantine system and the failure to assist families on low income to pay for mandatory hotel quarantine charges, thereby causing them to be stuck abroad. The case received wide media coverage and was settled after proceedings were issued and provision was made which assisted the Claimants’ return to the UK.
Munir v Revenue And Customs  EWCA Civ 799 – Farhan appeared before the Court of Appeal in a second appeal concerning novel points of law about the application of the Civil Evidence Act, where the Appellant sought to argue before a Tribunal that a criminal conviction for being knowingly concerned in the fraudulent evasion of tax did not automatically give rise to liability for excise duty following an assessment by HMRC. The Court of Appeal gave important guidance which may be of significance to numerous appeals before the First Tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber). The case has also been discussed in various blog posts due to its significance.
BA (Hons) Economics and Law – University of Leicester
BPTC- City Law School
Called to the Bar at Lincoln Inn
Law works and attorney general pro bono awards- runner up
University of Leicester entrance scholarship
The Jon Holyoak award
The Constitutional and Administrative Law Bar Association
The Property Bar Association
Human Rights Lawyers Association
The Public Access Bar Association