KembaraXtra - Case Law - QBE Management Services v. DymokeI

Case Overview

• Case Name: QBE Management Services (UK) Ltd v. Dymoke and Others
• Court: High Court, Queen's Bench Division
• Date: 27 January 2012
• Key Issue: Granting final injunctive "springboard relief" against defendants.

II. Facts of the Case

• Claimant: QBE Management Services (UK) Ltd (UK Subsidiary of QBE Insurance Group)
• Defendants:
  • Mr. Dymoke, Mr. Hearn, Mr. Kirk (the "trio") - Senior employees of British Marine (part of QBE).
  • PRO Insurance Solutions Ltd ("PRO") - Supported the trio's venture.
• Background:
  • The trio secretly planned a competing business.
  • They solicited employees from British Marine to join them, requiring them to keep silent.
  • They approached British Marine's brokers.
  • They secured investment using a business plan based on British Marine's confidential information.
  • Target launch date: February 20, 2012 (critical date for British Marine renewals).
  • The trio resigned in April 2011.
  • PRO provided logistical and financial support, aware of the trio's plans to bring employees, brokers, and confidential information.
  • Following the trio's resignations, eight other employees resigned.
• QBE's Argument: Defendants obtained a "springboard" advantage through unlawful conduct and breaches of employment contracts

III. High Court Holding

• Decision: Granted QBE final injunctive relief.
• Rationale: QBE was entitled to springboard relief against each defendant.

IV. Key Legal Principles
A. Duty of Fidelity

• Employees owe a contractual duty of "fidelity" to their employer. The extent depends on the facts of each case.
• Senior staff owe a greater degree of loyalty, fidelity, and diligence.
• Breaching the duty:
  • Recruiting/soliciting other employees to act in competition.
  • Misusing employer's confidential information.
• Activities affecting the employee's ability to serve faithfully and honestly is a breach.
• Directors and senior employees must disclose potential competitive activity.

B. Inducing Breach of Contract

• The defendant must know they are inducing the breach, including "turning a blind eye."

C. Springboard Relief

• Definition: An injunction restraining a wrongdoer to deprive them of the benefits of their unlawful acts.
• Scope: Not limited to breach of confidence; extends to breaches of contractual and fiduciary duties.
• Purpose: Prevent unfair advantage gained from unlawful acts.
• Aim: Restore parties to the competitive position they would have occupied absent the misconduct.
• Limitations:
  • Should not have a far-reaching effect (e.g., driving defendant out of business).
  • Not intended to punish but to protect against unlawful harm.
  • Not granted if monetary award is adequate.
  • Must be sought while the unlawful advantage is still being enjoyed.
  • Requires claimant to specify the nature and period of the competitive advantage.
  • An ephemeral or short-term advantage is insufficient.

D. Formulating Springboard Relief

• Principles:
  • Relief should fit the facts.
  • Restrain the unlawful activities constituting the springboard.
  • May restrain otherwise lawful activities on unlawful foundations.
  • Match the strength of the unlawfully used springboard.
  • Be fair, just, and equitable.

E. Measuring the Length of a Springboard Injunction

• Appropriate measure: the time it would have taken to achieve lawfully what was achieved unlawfully.
• Relative exercise: measure the advantage gained relative to the victim.
• Consider both positive (benefit to wrongdoer) and negative (harm to victim) effects of wrongful activities.
• Unlawful poaching of key staff, loss of key staff and market grounds.
• Look at the period of time over which the unlawful activities have in fact taken place.
• Factors Affecting Advantage:
  • Soliciting employees while still in a position of power.
  • Advantage of stealth and secrecy.

​
V. Application to the Present Case

• The trio engaged in a covert campaign to acquire QBE's people and business illegitimately.
• Numerous breaches of duties of fidelity, confidentiality, fiduciary duties, and contractual duties.
• A clear case for springboard relief.
• Damages were inadequate; only an injunction could protect QBE.
• The relief was to run until April 2012.
• PRO was liable for inducing numerous breaches of contract, with "knowing inducement."
• Enforcement of non-competition covenants was denied.
• Permission to appeal was refused.

Shariah- Upholding of Justice (al-‘Adl)

Meaning & Objective

• Al-‘Adl = Justice
  • Means placing things in their rightful place.
  • Giving every person their proper rights.
• One of the major objectives of Sharī‘ah in the social sphere.
• Ensures:
  • Fulfilment of rights
  • Balance between people
  • Removal of excess and unfairness in society
• Justice protects dignity and creates harmony.
• Justice is required in:
  • Actions
  • Words
  • Judgments
  • Social interaction

Scope of Justice

• Not limited to legal courts only.
• Covers all areas of life, including:
  • Individual behaviour
  • Family responsibilities
  • Business dealings
  • Community relationships
  • National conduct
  • International relations
• Justice applies both privately and publicly.

Qur’anic Foundation

Qur’an (Al-Ḥadīd: 25)

Allah sent Messengers and revealed Books so that people may establish justice.

Summary

• The main purpose of sending prophets and scriptures is to guide humanity toward justice.
• Justice is not optional; it is central to Islam’s message.
• Without justice, society collapses into oppression and inequality.

Justice Must Be Objective

• Justice in Sharī‘ah is neutral and must not be influenced by:
  • Racial identity
  • Tribal affiliation
  • Nationality
  • Religious bias
• All people must be treated fairly:
  • Muslim or non-Muslim
  • Friend or enemy
• Justice is based on truth, not personal feelings.

Additional Details

• Justice requires:
  • Fair testimony
  • Avoiding favoritism
  • Not allowing hatred to distort judgment
• Justice preserves trust and social stability.

Ibn Qayyim’s Explanation

• Justice must be upheld wherever it exists.
• Justice is the highest objective of Islam.
• Allah sent scriptures and prophets so that justice may be established.
• If a situation occurs where:
  • A ruling is not explicitly mentioned in the revealed law,
  • Muslims must choose the option that leads to justice.
• Any ruling that achieves fairness is part of Sharī‘ah.
• Any ruling leading to oppression is against Sharī‘ah, even if someone claims it is religious.

Summary

• Justice is the foundation of Islam.
• Truth and fairness must always be prioritized.
• Justice is universal — for all times and places.

Qur’an (Al-Mā’idah: 8)

Stand firm for Allah as just witnesses.
Do not allow hatred to lead you to injustice.
Be just — it brings you closer to piety.
Summary

• Muslims must be fair even toward those they dislike.
• Emotions must not interfere with truth.
• Justice is a sign of true piety (taqwa).

Justice with Non-Muslims

Qur’an (Al-Mumtaḥinah: 8)

Allah does not forbid you from being kind and just toward those who do not fight you because of religion nor force you from your homes. Allah loves those who are just.
Summary

• Muslims must treat peaceful non-Muslims fairly and kindly.
• Justice applies beyond religious boundaries.
• Justice is a universal principle of Islamic ethics.
• Allah loves people who practice justice.

Final Summary

• Al-‘Adl (justice) is a major objective of Sharī‘ah.
• It means putting everything in its proper place and giving everyone their due rights.
• Justice:
  • Removes oppression
  • Maintains social balance
  • Builds trust among society
• Justice must be practiced in every part of life:

personal, social, economic, political, and global.

• Qur’an emphasizes justice repeatedly — over fifty references.
• Prophets were sent and books revealed to establish justice.
• Justice must be objective and not influenced by hate, bias, or personal benefit.
• Muslims must be just with everyone, including enemies and non-Muslims.
• Ibn Qayyim states:
  • Justice must be pursued wherever it is found.
  • Any rule supporting justice aligns with Sharī‘ah;

any rule violating justice contradicts Sharī‘ah.

KembaraXtra-Case Law -R v Secretary of State for Transport ex parte Factortame Ltd [2000]
Case Overview

• Citation: R v Secretary of State for Transport ex parte Factortame Ltd and others [2000] All ER (D) 1174
• Court: Queen's Bench Division, Technology and Construction Court (England and Wales)
• Judge: Toulmin QC
• Date: 27 July 2000
• Subject: Costs, Part 36 Payments, CPR, Anglo-Spanish fisheries dispute.

Background

• Applicants were companies/individuals in the British fishing fleet who lost registration due to the Merchant Shipping Act 1988.
• The Act's nationality, domicile, and residency requirements were deemed a breach of Community Law by the ECJ.
• ECJ ruled applicants could claim damages if breaches were sufficiently serious.
• House of Lords held breaches were sufficiently serious, entitling applicants to compensation. Trial ordered to determine damages.
• Secretary of State made Part 36 payments, which applicants eventually accepted, some substantially after the 21-day acceptance period.
• Applicants sought orders to receive all their costs despite late acceptance.

Arguments
Applicants:

1. Accepted Part 36 payments shortly after a court ruling allowed the Secretary of State to use fresh evidence, substantially altering his case.
2. Lack of clarity in the Secretary of State's case and withholding of information at the time of the Part 36 payments.

Secretary of State:

• Denied deliberately withholding any information.

Court Ruling

• Overriding Principle: The court has broad discretion to do what is just in all circumstances, adhering to the overriding objective.
• Part 36 Payments & Costs:
  • Accepting a Part 36 payment after the deadline makes the accepting party the "unsuccessful party" from that date forward, regarding costs.
  • Generally, the unsuccessful party pays the successful party's costs (but the court can order differently).
  • This is a starting point only. The court must consider all circumstances, especially CPR 36.25.
• Time Extension for Complex Litigation:
  • In complex litigation, a longer period than 21 days may be required to assess Part 36 payments/offers, particularly if the offer is detailed and made during intensive trial preparation.
• Outcome in this Case:
  • The court extended the period for which the Secretary of State had to pay the applicants' costs for some issues.
  • After that extended period, the applicants were ordered to pay the Secretary of State's costs.

Key Principles

1. Discretionary Power: Courts have broad discretion in awarding costs, guided by justice and the overriding objective.
2. Part 36 Consequences: Late acceptance of Part 36 payments shifts the "unsuccessful party" designation for cost purposes.
3. Context Matters: The court must thoroughly evaluate the context of Part 36 payments, including the complexity of the litigation and the time reasonably needed for consideration.

Implications

• This case highlights the court's willingness to extend the standard Part 36 acceptance period in complex cases.
• It emphasizes that procedural rules are not applied rigidly, and the court retains discretion to ensure fairness and justice.

KembaraXtra-Case Law-Total Network SL v Revenue and Customs Comrs [2008] UKHL 19
I. Case Overview

• Citation: [2008] UKHL 19
• Court: House of Lords
• Facts: A Spanish company (Total Network SL) was allegedly involved in a VAT "carousel fraud." The UK tax authority (Revenue and Customs Commissioners) sought damages from Total Network SL for "unlawful means conspiracy" to recover unpaid VAT.

II. Key Issues

1. Common Law Action: Can the Commissioners pursue a common law action for damages to recover VAT from a party not directly liable for VAT under the statutory scheme (Value Added Tax Act 1994)?
   • Related Argument: Does such an action violate Article 4 of the Bill of Rights (1688), which prohibits levying money for the Crown without Parliamentary grant?
2. Unlawful Means Conspiracy: Is it essential for the tort of unlawful means conspiracy that the "unlawful means" used are independently actionable as a tort against at least one of the conspirators?

III. Background: Carousel Fraud (Missing Trader Intra-Community Fraud)

• Mechanism:
  1. Trader A (Member State 1) sells goods VAT-free to Trader B (Member State 2).
  2. Trader B sells goods to Trader C (Member State 2), charging VAT.
  3. Trader B ("missing trader") disappears without remitting the VAT collected to the tax authorities.
  4. Trader C reclaims the VAT paid to Trader B as input tax.
  5. Trader C sells the goods back to A (Member State 1) VAT-free.
• Profit: The conspirators profit by retaining the VAT that should have been paid to the tax authorities (the input tax received by Trader C).

IV. Arguments

• Commissioners' Argument:
  • Total Network SL conspired to deprive the revenue of VAT through unlawful means.
  • The unlawful means included:
    • The common law offense of cheating the revenue by the missing traders and/or the broker.
    • Fraudulent misrepresentations by the broker regarding the legitimacy of the transactions and VAT recoverability.
• Total Network SL's Argument:
  • The comprehensive VAT statutory scheme (Value Added Tax Act 1994) precludes a common law action for recovery of VAT.
  • Such an action would violate Article 4 of the Bill of Rights (1688).
  • The "unlawful means" must be independently actionable as a tort against at least one conspirator.

V. Held (Majority)

1. Common Law Action Permissible: The VAT Act 1994 and the Bill of Rights do not preclude the Commissioners from pursuing a common law action against Total Network SL.
   • Commissioners' powers derive not only from the 1994 Act but also the Commissioners for Revenue and Customs Act 2005.
   • The action seeks to recover fraudulently extracted money, not to levy a new tax.
   • The statutory scheme does not displace common law rights unless positively inconsistent.
   • While the Commissioners may be limited to statutory remedies against UK entities in the carousel, this does not preclude a common law action against Total Network SL for conspiracy.
2. Unlawful Means: Criminal conduct (cheating the revenue) can constitute "unlawful means" in unlawful means conspiracy, provided it intentionally inflicts harm.
   • It is not necessary for the unlawful means to be independently actionable as a separate tort.
   • Conspiracy requires damage intentionally inflicted by persons combined for that purpose.
   • "Unlawful means" has a wider meaning in conspiracy than in the intentional harm tort.

VI. Outcome

• Commissioners' appeal allowed.
• Total Network SL's cross-appeal dismissed.

VII. Key Principles & Implications

• Preservation of Common Law Remedies: Statutes should not be interpreted as displacing common law rights unless explicitly or implicitly inconsistent.
• Scope of Unlawful Means Conspiracy: "Unlawful means" is interpreted broadly and can include criminal offenses, even if not independently actionable as a tort.
• Combating VAT Fraud: This case affirms the ability of tax authorities to use common law actions to recover VAT lost through fraudulent schemes, even from parties not directly liable under the VAT statute.

VIII. Note: Dissent

• Lord Hope and Lord Neuberger dissented, highlighting the complexities and potential overreach of allowing a common law action in this context.

IX. Overruled/Considered

• Powell v Boladz (1998) 39 BMLR 35 overruled.
• OBG Ltd v Allan [2007] 4 All ER 545 considered.

KembaraXtra-Case Law-Aerostar Maintenance International Ltd v Wilson:
Case Overview

• Citation: Aerostar Maintenance International Ltd and another v Wilson and others [2010] All ER (D) 364 (Jul), [2010] EWHC 2032 (Ch)
• Court: Chancery Division, England and Wales
• Judge: Morgan J
• Date: 30 July 2010
• Area of Law: Fiduciary Duty, Tort Law (Inducing Breach of Contract, Conspiracy to Injure by Unlawful Means, Dishonest Assistance)

Key Facts

• Parties:
  • Claimants: Aerostar Maintenance International Ltd (AMIL), CAS (associated company of AMIL).
  • Defendants:
    • Wilson (Director of AMIL, later controlled Avman)
    • Defendant 2: Owner of a UK company with interest in aircraft
    • Avman (Company controlled by Wilson)
    • Defendant 4: Company Secretary of AMIL
• Background:
  • Wilson, as director of AMIL, negotiated a potential deal with Galaxy involving the purchase, maintenance, and repair of aircraft. AMIL would subcontract work to Romaero, with Galaxy paying AMIL.
  • Wilson left AMIL and established Avman. The contract with Galaxy and Romaero was revised to exclude AMIL and include Avman.
  • AMIL alleged Wilson diverted a business opportunity to Avman, breaching his fiduciary duty. Claims were also brought against other defendants for accessory liability and related torts.
• Central Issue: Whether Wilson breached his fiduciary duties as a director of AMIL, and whether other defendants were liable for accessory liability/tortious conduct.

Issues

1. Did Wilson breach his fiduciary duties as a director and obligations as an employee of AMIL?
2. Have the claims against the other defendants (D2, Avman) been substantiated?

Court Holding

1. Wilson's Breach of Fiduciary Duty:
   • Wilson breached his fiduciary duties as a director and his obligations as an employee of AMIL.
   • He did not act in good faith and sought to profit from his position, creating a conflict of interest.
   • He used information obtained as an employee for his own purposes without informed consent from AMIL's shareholders.
2. Liability of Other Defendants:
   • Defendant 2 (Accessory/Inducing Breach):
     • Defendant 2 knew Wilson's conduct would breach his obligations to AMIL.
     • The court found Defendant 2 liable for inducing or procuring a breach of contract.
     • Defendant 2 had the requisite intention to injure AMIL, and the breaches of fiduciary duty and contract were unlawful means.
   • Avman (Conspiracy/Dishonest Assistance/Knowing Receipt):
     • All the elements of conspiracy to injure AMIL by unlawful means were established.
     • Avman was liable for dishonestly assisting Wilson's breach of fiduciary duty.
     • Avman was subject to personal liability for knowing receipt of trust property (the contracts with Romaero and Galaxy) or its traceable proceeds.

Legal Principles Applied

1. Breach of Fiduciary Duty: A director must act in good faith, avoid conflicts of interest, and not profit from their position without informed consent.
2. Tort of Inducing or Procuring a Breach of Contract:
   • (i) Existence of a contract
   • (ii) Breach of that contract
   • (iii) Defendant's conduct procured/induced the breach
   • (iv) Defendant knew of the term breached or turned a blind eye
   • (v) Defendant realised their conduct would result in a breach
3. Tort of Conspiracy to Injure by Unlawful Means: Requires an agreement to injure the claimant using unlawful means, with the intent to injure. Breaches of fiduciary duty and contract are considered unlawful means.
4. Dishonest Assistance: Acting dishonestly in assisting a breach of fiduciary duty. Dishonesty = lack of probity; assessed objectively (what an honest person would do).
5. Knowing Receipt: Receiving property knowing it is trust property and that the transfer is a breach of trust.

Authorities Cited

• Royal Brunei Airlines Sdn v Tan [1995] 3 All ER 97 (Dishonest Assistance)
• OBG Ltd v Allan; Douglas v Hello! Ltd (No 3) (Tortious Interference)
• Mainstream Properties Ltd v Young [2007] 4 All ER 545 (Fiduciary Duty)​

Shariah -Educating the Individual (Tahdhīb al-Fard)

Main Notes

• One main objective of Sharī‘ah is to educate individuals.
• Sharī‘ah injunctions help people grow in faith, honesty, righteousness, trustworthiness.
• When individuals are reformed, society becomes better.
• Sharī‘ah rules related to:
  • ʿIbādah (worship)
  • Muʿāmalah (transactions)
  • Jināyah (criminal laws)

→ All aim to educate believers.

• Purpose:
  • Make Muslims responsible members of society.
  • Prevent harm to others.
• ʿIbādah purifies the heart from:
  • Corruption
  • Selfishness
  • Excessive material desire

1) Example of ʿIbādah → Prayer

Qur’ān Verse

“And perform as-ṣalāh (prayer). Surely prayer keeps one away from indecency and evil, and certainly the remembrance of Allah is the greatest.”
— Surah Al-‘Ankabūt (29): 45

Note-form Summary

• Salāh involves mental + physical training.
• Leads to inner perfection.
• Brings person closer to Allah.
• Other ʿibādah also aims for same benefit:
  • Fasting
  • Zakāh
  • Ḥajj

2) Education in Muʿāmalah (Dealings)

• Sharī‘ah aims to educate people to:
  • Be just
  • Be honest
  • Be trustworthy
  • Agree by mutual consent
  • Have social responsibility

Qur’ān Verse

“O you who believe! Do not eat your property among yourselves unjustly, except if it is a trade with mutual consent… Do not kill yourselves. Surely Allah is Merciful to you.”
— Surah Al-Nisā’ (4): 29

Note-form Summary

• Business must be honest.
• Must be based on mutual consent.
• Unjust wealth is forbidden.
• Do not harm yourself or others.

3) Contracts in Islam

• Permitted contracts:
  • Sale
  • Lease
  • Hire
• Prohibited contracts:
  • Usury (ribā)
  • Gambling
  • Gharar (uncertainty)
  • Ambiguous contracts
• Goal: Protect society and fairness.

4) Crimes and Punishment

• Punishment in Sharī‘ah aims to:
  • Discipline wrongdoer
  • Prevent others from crime
• Public execution of punishment:
  • Creates awareness
  • Stops repetition of crime

Qur’ān Verse

“The woman and the man guilty of illegal sexual intercourse – flog each of them with 100 lashes…”
— Surah Al-Nūr (24): 2

Note-form Summary

• Zina (illegal intercourse) punishment is 100 lashes.
• Must be witnessed by believers.
• Purpose:
  • Strong message
  • Prevents future crimes
  • Reduces negative effects on society​

Shariah -Differences Between Shariah and Fiqh

Sharīʿah (الشريعة)

Definition

Sharīʿah is the Divine law revealed by Allah to guide humanity. It represents the totality of God’s will as conveyed through:

• The Qur’an
• The authentic Sunnah of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ

It is the path that Allah has chosen for the spiritual, moral, social, and legal well-being of humankind.


Nature and Characteristics

• Divine origin: It comes directly from Allah.
• Perfect and complete: It cannot be altered or improved.
• Universal: Applies to all Muslims across time and place.
• Comprehensive: Covers every aspect of life—beliefs, acts of worship, morals, and laws.

Sharīʿah functions as the broad framework for Islamic life. It tells us what Allah wants from us in terms of belief, behavior, and conduct. Its fundamental sources are infallible, unlike human interpretations.


Scope of Sharīʿah

Sharīʿah encompasses:

1. ʿAqīdah (Belief): Tawḥīd, angels, prophets, Hereafter, etc.
2. ʿIbādah (Worship): Prayer, fasting, zakāh, ḥajj.
3. Akhlāq (Ethics/Morality): Honesty, justice, humility.
4. Muʿāmalāt (Transactions): Business, marriage, inheritance.
5. ʿUqūbāt (Legal penalties): Laws of justice and crime.

Thus, Sharīʿah is the complete divinely guided system for human life.


Fiqh (الفقه)

Definition

Fiqh literally means understanding or deep comprehension.
In Islamic sciences, it denotes the human understanding and interpretation of Sharīʿah to derive practical rulings for new or detailed situations.


It is the product of scholarly reasoning based on the Qur’an, Sunnah, and other juristic tools.


Nature and Characteristics

• Human effort: Developed by jurists through study and reasoning.
• Flexible: Can adapt to changing times, cultures, and circumstances.
• Subject to difference: Scholars may disagree based on methodology.
• Not absolute: Because it is a product of human reasoning, it may be revised or improved when better evidence appears.

Unlike Sharīʿah, which is divine, Fiqh represents the application of divine guidance to specific contexts.

Scope of Fiqh

Fiqh primarily deals with:

• Practical legal rulings such as what is permissible (ḥalāl), forbidden (ḥarām), obligatory (wājib), recommended (mustaḥabb), disliked (makrūh), and permissible (mubāḥ).
• Ritual details such as how to pray, specific rules of fasting, marriage, business contracts, criminal procedure, etc.

To derive these rulings, scholars use sources that support and explain the Qur’an and Sunnah, including ijmāʿ (consensus), qiyās (analogy), ijtihād (independent reasoning), and others.


Key Difference in Essence

Sharīʿah is the Divine ideal—perfect, universal, and unchanging.
Fiqh is the human understanding of that ideal—limited, varied, and adaptable.


Sharīʿah provides the foundation, while Fiqh provides the detailed structure built upon that foundation.


Illustrative Example


Sharīʿah commands Muslims to pray.
This is a divine instruction and cannot be changed.


Fiqh explains:

• The conditions of prayer,
• How to perform it,
• The actions that invalidate it,
• Differences in practice between schools of law.

These details are derived by scholars through interpretive methods and may differ based on evidence and reasoning.


Relationship Between Sharīʿah and Fiqh


Sharīʿah is like a pure source; Fiqh is how scholars draw from and apply that source.
Without Sharīʿah, Fiqh would have no foundation. Without Fiqh, Muslims would struggle to apply Sharīʿah to real-life situations.


Thus, Fiqh is a reflection of Sharīʿah in practical form.



Conclusion

• Sharīʿah is Allah’s eternal and perfect guidance.
• Fiqh is the human interpretation of that guidance to address real-world issues.

Sharīʿah is infallible and constant;
Fiqh is fallible and capable of diversity.


Together, they form the basis of how Islam is understood and practiced by individuals and societies.






​

Shariah-Educating the Individual (Tahdhīb al-Fard)

Main Notes

• One main objective of Sharī‘ah is to educate individuals.
• Sharī‘ah injunctions help people grow in faith, honesty, righteousness, trustworthiness.
• When individuals are reformed, society becomes better.
• Sharī‘ah rules related to:
  • ʿIbādah (worship)
  • Muʿāmalah (transactions)
  • Jināyah (criminal laws)

→ All aim to educate believers.

• Purpose:
  • Make Muslims responsible members of society.
  • Prevent harm to others.
• ʿIbādah purifies the heart from:
  • Corruption
  • Selfishness
  • Excessive material desire

1) Example of ʿIbādah → Prayer

Qur’ān Verse

“And perform as-ṣalāh (prayer). Surely prayer keeps one away from indecency and evil, and certainly the remembrance of Allah is the greatest.”
— Surah Al-‘Ankabūt (29): 45

Note-form Summary

• Salāh involves mental + physical training.
• Leads to inner perfection.
• Brings person closer to Allah.
• Other ʿibādah also aims for same benefit:
  • Fasting
  • Zakāh
  • Ḥajj

2) Education in Muʿāmalah (Dealings)

• Sharī‘ah aims to educate people to:
  • Be just
  • Be honest
  • Be trustworthy
  • Agree by mutual consent
  • Have social responsibility

Qur’ān Verse

“O you who believe! Do not eat your property among yourselves unjustly, except if it is a trade with mutual consent… Do not kill yourselves. Surely Allah is Merciful to you.”
— Surah Al-Nisā’ (4): 29

Note-form Summary

• Business must be honest.
• Must be based on mutual consent.
• Unjust wealth is forbidden.
• Do not harm yourself or others.

3) Contracts in Islam

• Permitted contracts:
  • Sale
  • Lease
  • Hire
• Prohibited contracts:
  • Usury (ribā)
  • Gambling
  • Gharar (uncertainty)
  • Ambiguous contracts
• Goal: Protect society and fairness.

4) Crimes and Punishment

• Punishment in Sharī‘ah aims to:
  • Discipline wrongdoer
  • Prevent others from crime
• Public execution of punishment:
  • Creates awareness
  • Stops repetition of crime

Qur’ān Verse

“The woman and the man guilty of illegal sexual intercourse – flog each of them with 100 lashes…”
— Surah Al-Nūr (24): 2

Note-form Summary

• Zina (illegal intercourse) punishment is 100 lashes.
• Must be witnessed by believers.
• Purpose:
  • Strong message
  • Prevents future crimes
  • Reduces negative effects on society​