BILLIONAIRE Mark Cuban made a large purchase in Texas. Not only is Cuban the owner of the Dallas Mavericks, he owns a part of Texas…
An unemployed 41-year-old man has seen an attempt to make his parents pay for his maintenance thrown out by the courts.
Faiz Siddiqui, who trained as a lawyer himself, claims he is dependent on his “enormously wealthy” parents Rakshanda, 69, and Javed Siddiqui, 71.
The Oxford graduate was living a luxury life in a rent-free £1 million flat in London's swanky Hyde Park and was given handouts to fund his lifestyle.
However, a fallout with the family meant his support was cut off by his parents.
Mr Siddiqui then tried to sue his parents to force them to pay for everything in a test case which was a first for the UK.
Judges threw the case out but if Mr Siddiqui had won, it could have set a precedent where parents were obliged to support their adult children.
Mr Siddiqui was made unemployed in 2011 but has been helped financially by his parents for over 20 years.
His barrister Hugh Southey QC argued that he is entitled to apply for maintenance under the 1989 Children's Act due to health issues which made him “vulnerable”.
Teen's giant flesh-eating ulcers engulf her face and leave her scared to leave house
Both parents wanted to limit the amount of money they gave him to just £400-a-week but he claims the handouts had "nurtured" his dependence on them.
As reported by The Mirror, his parents’ barrister, Justin Warshaw QC, said: “What Mr Siddiqui seeks is to foist a relationship of financial dependency on parents who do not wish that relationship to continue.
“These long-suffering parents have reached their own view of what is suitable provision for their difficult, demanding and pertinacious 41-year-old son.”
Couple still enjoy naughty bedroom antics despite 39-year age gap
He went on to tell the court that the parents already pay for his utilities and give him “£1,500 or so a month.”
The barrister also highlighted that Mr Siddiqui assumes that he is entitled to money from his parents and “this is wrong”.
Mr Siddiqui previously tried to sue Oxford University for “appallingly bad” teaching but was defeated in his claims.
For the latest breaking news and stories from across the globe from the Daily Star, sign up for our newsletter by clicking here.
He argued that tuition and staff on sabbaticals meant he only got a 2:1 and not a first-class degree.
Because of the lower grade, Mr Siddiqui claimed it cost him his legal career because he was denied on a law course at a prestigious US Ivy League university.
Mr Siddiqui and his barrister Roger Mallalieu gave the valuation of £1 million in loss of earnings in a claim against the Chancellor from Masters and Scholars of the University of Oxford.
Source: Read Full Article