Allproperty Claims Ltd v Pang

Allproperty Claims Ltd v Pang

The agreement is unenforceable against Mr Tang because APC failed to provide him with a written notice of the right to cancel at the time the contract was made, as required by Regulation 7(6) of the Cancellation of Contracts Regulations 2008. This technical breach renders the contract irredeemably unenforceable, regardless of the parties’ actual knowledge or conduct. All other defences and counterclaims fail on their merits.

Parties
Claimant: All Property Claims Limited; Defendant / Part 20 Claimant: Mr Tang Pang; Part 20 Defendant: ITC Compliance Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 June 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil (contract/insurance) / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed; counterclaim dismissed; Part 20 claim succeeds in part (no damages).
Legal Topics
Cancellation of Contracts, Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts, Insurance Conduct of Business (icobs), Client Asset Rules (cass), Assignment of Claims
Contract Law Consumer Protection Insurance Law Financial Regulation Cancellation of Contracts Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Insurance Conduct of Business (icobs) Client Asset Rules (cass) +1 more

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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

All Property Claims Limited

Claimant

Mr Tang Pang

Defendant / Part 20 Claimant

ITC Compliance Limited

Part 20 Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (contract/insurance) / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the agreement is unenforceable for failure to provide cancellation notice under the Cancellation of Contracts Regulations 2008
  2. 2 Whether APC breached ICOBS rules regarding clarity and fairness of information
  3. 3 Whether contract terms were unfair under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999

Ratio Decidendi

The agreement is unenforceable against Mr Tang because APC failed to provide him with a written notice of the right to cancel at the time the contract was made, as required by Regulation 7(6) of the Cancellation of Contracts Regulations 2008. This technical breach renders the contract irredeemably unenforceable, regardless of the parties’ actual knowledge or conduct. All other defences and counterclaims fail on their merits.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; counterclaim dismissed; Part 20 claim succeeds in part (no damages).

Orders

  • APC’s claim against Mr Tang is dismissed.
  • Mr Tang’s counterclaim against APC is dismissed.