Blacklion Law LLP v Amira Nature Foods Ltd & Anor [2022] EWHC 1500 (Ch) (20 June 2022)

Blacklion Law LLP v Amira Nature Foods Ltd & Anor [2022] EWHC 1500 (Ch) (20 June 2022)

The words 'subject to the completion of the Matter by 31 May 2017' in the Avatar Retainer did not make payment of the fixed fee conditional on completion of the bond issue by that date. Instead, they capped the fee for work done up to that date, with further work to be charged separately. The claimant's Terms of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 1500 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Blacklion Law LLP; First Defendant: Amira Nature Foods Limited; Second Defendant: Karan Chanana
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 June 2022
Procedural Posture
Commercial Contract Claim (breach of Contract) / High Court Trial Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed
Legal Topics
Construction of Contracts, Rectification, Solicitor Client Retainer, Contractual Interest, Procuring Breach of Contract
Contract Law Commercial Law Construction of Contracts Rectification Solicitor Client Retainer Contractual Interest Procuring Breach of Contract

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Blacklion Law LLP

Claimant

Amira Nature Foods Limited

First Defendant

Karan Chanana

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Contract Claim (breach of Contract) / High Court Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the payment obligation under the Avatar Retainer was conditional on completion of the bond issue by 31 May 2017
  2. 2 Whether the contract should be rectified if the claimant's construction fails
  3. 3 Whether the second defendant is liable for procuring breach of contract

Ratio Decidendi

The words 'subject to the completion of the Matter by 31 May 2017' in the Avatar Retainer did not make payment of the fixed fee conditional on completion of the bond issue by that date. Instead, they capped the fee for work done up to that date, with further work to be charged separately. The claimant's Terms of Business, including the contractual interest provision, applied to the Avatar Retainer. The claimant was therefore entitled to the fixed fee and contractual interest.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed

Orders

  • Defendants to pay the claimant the fixed fee of £300,000 under the Avatar Retainer
  • Defendants to pay contractual interest at 1.5% per month from 30 days after the date of the unpaid invoice, pursuant to the claimant's Terms of Business