Moqsud Ahmed Khan v Abdul Malik & Anor

Moqsud Ahmed Khan v Abdul Malik & Anor

The oral agreement of 8 August 2016 was sufficiently certain to be enforceable as it was not an agreement for lease but an agreement to offer a lease to a new entity controlled by Fahmida Malik. The essential terms could be inferred from the context, including the draft Moitree lease. The Defendant breached the agreement by failing to grant a lease to the Claimants or their nominee. The Claimants were entitled to recover reliance losses, including the cost of Moitree shares and refurbishment expenses, as these were wasted by reason of the Defendant's breach.

Parties
Appellant/defendant: Moqsud Ahmed Khan; Claimant/respondent: Abdul Malik; Claimant/respondent: Adnan Malik
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Certainty of Contract, Agreements for Lease, Damages for Breach of Contract, Reliance Loss, Restitution/unjust Enrichment
Contract Law Landlord and Tenant Law Certainty of Contract Agreements for Lease Damages for Breach of Contract Reliance Loss Restitution/unjust Enrichment

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Moqsud Ahmed Khan

Appellant/defendant

Abdul Malik

Claimant/respondent

Adnan Malik

Claimant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the oral agreement of 8 August 2016 was sufficiently certain to be enforceable
  2. 2 Whether the Defendant was in breach of the agreement by not granting a lease to the Claimants or their nominee
  3. 3 Whether the Claimants were entitled to recover reliance losses, including the cost of Moitree shares and refurbishment expenses

Ratio Decidendi

The oral agreement of 8 August 2016 was sufficiently certain to be enforceable as it was not an agreement for lease but an agreement to offer a lease to a new entity controlled by Fahmida Malik. The essential terms could be inferred from the context, including the draft Moitree lease. The Defendant breached the agreement by failing to grant a lease to the Claimants or their nominee. The Claimants were entitled to recover reliance losses, including the cost of Moitree shares and refurbishment expenses, as these were wasted by reason of the Defendant's breach.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Permission to appeal granted but appeal dismissed
  • Parties to agree a form of order as to costs for approval by the court