LONDON: In a development that is being claimed as a victory by both sides, the Royal Courts of Justice this week issued a detailed order in the London properties case, brought by former Altaf Hussain loyalists and MQM-Pakistan against MQM-London, effectively sending the matter involving several multi-million pound London properties, back to the courts.

In a statement, MQM-London said the Court of Appeal accepted Mr Hussain’s appeal and decided the case in his favour.

The decision, which has been anticipated since April 2024, marks a new turn in the years-long properties case which saw Mr Hussain and his former party leaders come face to face in a drawn-out court battle.

MQM-London welcomed the decision, and a spokesperson for Mr Hussain told Dawn the MQM supremo and his supporters are celebrating.

Both MQM-P and MQM-London ‘claim victory’; appeal gives Altaf last shot to reclaim London properties

On the other hand, MQM-P gave the impression that the development was a severe blow to Mr Hussain, as the appeal court had sent the case back to the high court.

This case is Mr Hussain’s second major legal battle, with the first being a case based on charges of inciting violence and encouraging terrorism in Karachi. He was eventually victorious in the latter case.

When Mr Hussain lost the properties case during the trial stages and filed an appeal, it was believed that he would be left with nothing if the appeal was denied. Some speculated that he may be rendered homeless.

However, this development indicates that the MQM properties saga will continue to play out in British courts.

Details of appeal

The court case between two MQM factions revolved around several complex legal issues, particularly regarding the interpretation of constitutional amendments and the roles of trustees.

The first issue addressed by Lord Justice Nugee in the appeal was that of identity. The appeal was allowed on this ground, meaning that the judge concluded that MQM-P could claim to be MQM only if it was constitutionally a valid development of the original party. This decision hinges on resolving the constitutional issues that determine the validity of MQM-P’s claim.

The second grounds of appeal was about trustees raising constitutional issues. On this, the judge ruled that the defendants (trustees) could defend themselves against the breach of trust claim by arguing that MQM-P is not the same as ‘MQM’. The judge emphasised that trustees have the right to defend their conduct and are not required to remain neutral in such cases.

The judge also found that Mr Hussain’s announcement on August 23, 2016, which handed over complete authority to the Rabita Committee, meant he was stepping back from his role under Article 9(b) of the party’s April 2016 constitution. However, the judge acknowledged that further findings were necessary to determine whether this stepping back was temporary or permanent.

The judge also addressed the majority requirement, in that he interpreted Article 9(a) of the 2016 constitution to mean that important decisions required a two-thirds majority of those present at a scheduled meeting, and not the entire committee. The appeal on this ground was dismissed.

The constitutional issues will be remitted back to the High Court for further hearing, and it will need to determine if MQM-P’s amendments to the April 2016 Constitution were legitimate, giving MQM-P standing to bring the claim.

The case will proceed with the understanding that as of August 31, 2016, the April 2016 Constitution was the one in force, while the true effect of Altaf Hussain stepping down from the top spot remains unresolved. Parties will now need to apply to the high court for further directions.

History

In March 2023, MQM-P secured a legal victory against Mr Hussain in a case regarding the ownership of seven properties in London.

Judge Clive Jones of the High Court of Justice Business and Property Court of England and Wales had ruled that MQM-P is the legitimate MQM, making its members the rightful beneficiaries of the properties in question.

The court concluded that the 2015 MQM Constitution was not adopted by MQM-P, but rather the April 2016 Constitution was.

A new constitution disassociating Mr Hussain was then created by MQM-P, which the claimants relied on for the possession of the London properties.

MQM-P leaders had celebrated the verdict and had announced plans to allocate part of the properties to the family of the slain MQM leader Dr Imran Farooq.

But Mr Hussain later challenged the decision in the high court.

Published in Dawn, July 17th, 2024