Mashood Iqbal

Call: 2011

Practice areas

Public Access : Yes

Education

LLM

MA

GDL

LLB

BA

Background

Before being Called to the Bar of England & Wales, Mashood had set up his solicitor practice in 2006 after being admitted to the Roll of Solicitors in England & Wales. He would specialise in Financial Regulation & Compliance, Banking & Securities, Competition Law and Intellectual Property law.

During the last five years Mashood had successfully handled complex claims in Company & Commercial and Public Law matters both on behalf of and against business giants such as Wachovia Bank, Macquarie Bank, Nationwide Building Society, National Express, Virgin Media, Hyde Housing Association, Momentum Group, Tulip Group and AMJ International. Mashood advises on all aspects of financial regulation and compliance, corporate finance and business mergers & acquisitions process such as from negotiating heads of terms, drafting contracts, developing integration plans i.e. transfer of employees, acquisition/transfer of equity, investigation into actual & potential liabilities, sale and purchase of share capital, finalizing the deals, collaborative agreements, demergers and re-organization.

In 2004 Mashood was admitted to the Roll of Advocates in Pakistan. From 1999 until 2004 Mashood worked as a paralegal in Pakistan

For over two decades Mashood has been enjoying a vibrant practice as an advocate both in England & Wales and internationally. He regularly appears in the Court of Appeal, High Court, Crown Courts, County Courts, Magistrates Courts and Tribunals in England & Wales. Whilst in international arena Mashood is making his mark in commercial litigation and arbitration in the UAE (Dubai, Abu Dhabi & Qatar) and in Singapore.

 

Immigration Law

Mashood has extensive knowledge and confidence when dealing with Immigration Law.

Having been involved in numerous cases at the Court of Appeal, Upper Tribunal and First Tier Tribunal. Mashood’s meticulously crafted legal arguments have an appealing blend and touch of subjectivity for each client as well as justifiable objectivity. He therefore maintains an unparalleled record of impressive results.

Court of Appeal:

 

  • Awan v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2018] EWCA Civ 1988: A challenge to the Secretary of State’s refusal to grant leave to remain as Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) Migrant. An appeal involving interpretation of paragraph 41 – SD of the Immigration Rules wherein Lord Justice Underhill said: “I have been much assisted by clear and focused submissions on paper and orally by Mr Mashood Iqbal” and “I repeat my gratitude to counsel for their careful submissions in an area where the requirements of the rules are not as clear as anyone would wish.”
  • KM (Bangladesh) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] EWCA Civ 437: A challenge to the Upper Tribunal’s refusal to accept an out of time appeal. An appeal involving complex questions of interpretation of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcements Act 2007 wherein Lord Justice Ryder said: “In oral argument both Mr Iqbal for the appellant … very helpfully took the court to the relevant tribunal and court rules.”
  • R v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex p Khan [2017] EWCA Civ 221: In an application to the Court of Appeal whereby the Claimant was seeking to challenge the Upper Tribunal’s refusal to grant permission for judicial review, Lady Justice Rafferty said: “Mr Iqbal who has latterly and generously provided in written form his distillation of how matters might best be advanced for the assistance of the court, and I am grateful.”
  • HK (Bangladesh) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] EWCA Civ 737: A statutory appeal involving issues of proper interpretation of Immigration Rules relating to Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) applications for leave to remain.
  • Shahzad v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] EWCA Civ 576: A challenge to the Secretary of State’s refusal to grant leave to remain under Article 8 private life wherein Lord Justice Elias said: “Mr Iqbal has put the arguments attractively this morning.”
  • SI (Bangladesh) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] EWCA Civ 737: A challenge to the Secretary of State’s refusal to grant leave to remain as a Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) migrant and interpretation of paragraph 41 – SD of Appendix A of the Immigration Rules.

Administrative Court (Judicial Review):

 

  • Sandhu UK Scaffolding & Construction Ltd & Others v Rupvinder Bhupinder Singh & Others [2017] EWHC 1343 (QB): A commercial claim in which Mr Iqbal, while representing the Claimants under direct access, obtained freezing injunction and thereafter successfully prosecuted the Defendants in a civil claim for contempt of court. Mr Justice Spencer said: “The Claimant’s were represented by their direct access barrister, Mr Iqbal.” And, “Mr Iqbal in his submissions yesterday very property conceded this point.” And “Again, Mr Iqbal very properly accepted that proposition in the course of argument yesterday.”
  • R –v– Secretary of State for the Home Department ex p Arifin [2015] EWHC 637 (Admin): A judicial review challenge against the Secretary of State’s decision refusing to grant leave to remain on the basis of Article 8 (family life): “Mr Iqbal has rightly noted that potentially a significant factor in the case is that … no few than six family members have some form of leave to remain.”
  • R –v– Secretary of State for the Home Department ex p Butt [2013] EWHC 3216 (Admin): A judicial review challenge against the Secretary of State’s decision refusing to grant leave to remain under legacy scheme: “The basis upon which Mr Iqbal now advances his case is that the Secretary of State in applying her current guidance in Chapter 53 of the Enforcement Instructions Guidance either misinterpreted that guidance in relation to this case, or misunderstood or misapplied the facts in the context of that guidance and so the judgment on legacy and the application of Chapter 53 was wrong in law for that reason.”
  • R –v– Secretary of State for the Home Department ex p Muzaffar [2013] EWHC 3222 (Admin): A judicial review challenge regarding proper interpretation of Immigration Rules regarding Tier 4 (General) Students.
  • R –v– Secretary of State for the Home Department ex p Raza [2013] EWHC 984 (Admin): A judicial review challenge regarding proper interpretation of Immigration Rules regarding Tier 1 (Post-Study Work) Migrants.

Upper Tribunal (Immigration & Asylum Chamber)

 

  • R v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex p Saha [2017] All ER (D) 111 (Jan): A judicial review to the Secretary of State’s decision to refuse the application for leave to remain on the basis of TOEIC/ETS deception. Mr Justice McCloskey said: “The centrepiece of the clear and economic argument developed by Mr Iqbal focused on the Secretary of State’s evidence …”.
  • Akhter and another (paragraph 245AA: wrong format) [2014] UKUT 297 (IAC): A bank letter, which does not specify the postal address, landline telephone number and email address of the account holders is not thereby “in the wrong format” for the purposes of paragraph 245AA of the immigration rules (documents not submitted with applications).
  • Durrani (Entrepreneurs: bank letters; evidential flexibility) [2014] UKUT 295 (IAC): Appeal in relation to proper interpretation of paragraph 41 – SD [Tier 1 (Entrepreneur)] of Appendix A of the Immigration Rules.
  • Fayyaz (Entrepreneurs: paragraph 41-SD(a)(i) – “provided to”)[2014] UKUT 296 (IAC): The words “provided to” in paragraph 41-SD(a)(i) (9) of Appendix A (Attributes for Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) Migrants) have the same meaning as “available to.” Whilst the Rule has now been amended to this effect, the previous wording of the Rule did not give rise to any absurdity or doubt in construction.
  • Nasim and others (Raju: reasons not to follow?) [2013] UKUT 00610 (IAC): Interpretation of s85A of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 and also Tier 1 (Post-Study Work) category.

Family Law

Mashood’s profound knowledge of Family Law extends through his experience in both public and private family law. Having appeared in both the county court and high court numerous times. Mashood takes pride in helping families that have to undergo the legal system.

Clients have praised Mashood’s conduct and advocacy skills within the court room.

Mashood has represented his clients at all stages of different family law proceedings. Such as;

  • Multiple and single day Final Hearings
  • Multiple and single day Fact-Finding Hearings
  • Directions
  • Dispute Resolution Hearings
  • First Appointment Hearings

Mashood accepts instructions in all family law areas:

    • Child Arrangement Matters
    • Divorce and Ancillary Relief
    • Care Proceedings
    • Non-molestation

Commercial Law

Mashood has developed over the years a commercial based practice and even has begun making his mark internationally in commercial litigation and arbitration in the UAE (Dubai, Abu Dhabi & Qatar) and in Singapore.

Mashood widely accepts instructions in:

  •  Business Law
  • Commercial (Arbitration and Litigation)
  • Financial Regulations
  • Banking and securities

 

Memberships

  • Chartered Institute of Securities & Investments
  • Dubai International Financial Centre Courts
  • Abu Dhabi Global Markets Courts
  • Qatar International Court & Dispute Resolution Centre
  • Singapore International Commercial Court
  • Advocate of High Courts of Pakistan

Languages

Urdu, Arabic, Hindi, Punjabi (All fluent)

Related news

Mashood Iqbal
10 King's Bench Walk
Temple
London EC4Y 7EB
(t) +44 (0)20 7353 7742
(f) +44 (0)20 7583 0579
(DX) 24 LDE

Menu