1) Section 17 of the Children Act 1989 2) Boxall and Boxall Versus Waltham Forest London Borough Council 3) Statutory Instrument 2002 No 2051
Dear Attorney General’s Office,
We, Ismail Abdulhai Bhamjee and Mrs Sahera Ismail Bhamjee do hereby request that:-
1) When the Law Officers on behalf of the Solicitor General or HM Attorney General when Authorising an Application for a Section 42 of the Senior Court Act 1981, do they take account of Section 17 of the Children Act 1989.
The Homelessness (Priority need for Accomodation) (England) Order 2002
Statutory Instrument 2002 No 2051
As there are many Persons who have been declared as Vexatious Litigants when they shouldn't have been declared as Vexatious Litigants.
2) Do You have the decision given in Boxal and Boxal Versus the Waltham Forest London Borough Council where the Report has been published on the West Law where your Office does have reasonable Access.
3) Does the Law Officers or the HM Attorney General have revoked The Statutory Instrument 2002 No 2052 The Homelessness Priority Need for accomodation) (England) Order 2002
4) Does the Law Officers in the HM Attorney General Chambers have the decision given in the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom of Patel (Respondent) Versus Mirza (Appellant)
Judgment given on the 20th July 2016 which was heard on the 16th and 17th February 2016 Before 9 Nine Judges of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom
5) Does the Attorney General have the decision made in the House of Lords of Davy (Respondent) V Spelthorne Borough Council (Appellants)
judgment given on the 13th October 1983.
6) Do the Law Officers check Schedule 7 of the Senior Courts Act 1981 Repeals of The Supreme Court of Jurisdiction and Consolidation Act 1925.
Who is in Contempt of Court when relying on repealed parliament Act?
7) The Court of Appeal before than Lord Justice Donaldson and Others had stated they will inform the Attorney General of the History of my Applications and whether the Attorney General wants to issue an application under Section 42 of the Senior Court Act 1981 whilst the Solicitors were using the name and title of the Former Wife by seeking the attorney General authorise an application under Section 51 of the Supreme Court of Jurisdiction and Consolidation Act 1925.
8) How many decisions have been made under Section 5 of the Family Law Act 1986?
Ismail Abdulhai Bhamjee
Thank you for contacting the Attorney General’s Office (AGO).
Please note the Attorney General provides legal advice to the government
and is unable to give legal advice, assistance or support to individuals.
The Attorney General does not have investigatory powers.
We strive to answer all correspondence that falls within the remit of the
AGO within 20 days. However, we are unable to reply to matters that do not
fall within the responsibility of the department.
If your correspondence is in relation to:
· Courts or judges – please contact the Ministry of Justice:
· Police – please contact the Home Office:
You may wish to redirect your correspondence to another department that
has responsibility for the issue you have raised.
If your email is regarding the case of David de Freitas, please note that
the Attorney General is giving consideration to the requests made by Mr De
Freitas, and will make a decision in due course.
More information about the role of the AGO can be found at our website:
Dear Ismail Abdulhai Bhamjee,
Thank you for your FOI request to the Attorney General’s Office (AGO).
The AGO will respond to your request within the deadline requirement of the FOIA legislation.
E: [Attorney General’s Office request email]
T: 020 7271 2492
5-8 The Sanctuary, London, SW1P 3JS
@attorneygeneral | gov.uk/ago
Making law and politics work together at the heart of the UK constitution
We work to defend the right to FOI for everyone
Help us protect your right to hold public authorities to account. Donate and support our work.Donate Now