IRINA IDJATULINA v FINISHING TOUCHES (SPMU) LTD

IRINA IDJATULINA v FINISHING TOUCHES (SPMU) LTD

The Recorder was entitled to find, on the evidence, that there was no express contractual term for facial rejuvenation training, no actionable misrepresentation regarding the course or machine, and that all agreed training was provided. The Appellant's fresh evidence did not meet the threshold for admission on appeal and would not have influenced the outcome. The appeal was dismissed as the lower court's findings were open to it on the evidence and no error of law or fact was established.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: Irina Idjatulina; Defendant/respondent: Finishing Touches (SPMU) Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 December 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From County Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Misrepresentation, Admissibility of Fresh Evidence, Appeals Procedure
Contract Law Tort Law Breach of Contract Misrepresentation Admissibility of Fresh Evidence Appeals Procedure

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Irina Idjatulina

Claimant/appellant

Finishing Touches (SPMU) Ltd

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From County Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was an express term in the contract to provide facial rejuvenation training
  2. 2 Whether there was actionable misrepresentation regarding course content and machine purchase
  3. 3 Whether fresh evidence should be admitted on appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The Recorder was entitled to find, on the evidence, that there was no express contractual term for facial rejuvenation training, no actionable misrepresentation regarding the course or machine, and that all agreed training was provided. The Appellant's fresh evidence did not meet the threshold for admission on appeal and would not have influenced the outcome. The appeal was dismissed as the lower court's findings were open to it on the evidence and no error of law or fact was established.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • All claims dismissed
  • No fresh evidence admitted on appeal