Zabihi v Janzemini & Ors

Zabihi v Janzemini & Ors

The claimant established that he entrusted four sets of diamond and gold jewellery to the first defendant, who failed to return them or account for their proceeds. The court found the claimant's documentary evidence (the Zandieh letter and related faxes) to be fabricated but accepted, on the balance of probabilities, that valuable jewellery was handed over and converted. The court assessed the open market value of the jewellery at £125,000. The claimant failed to prove his monetary claim for £70,000, and the first defendant succeeded on his counterclaim for £20,000. The claim against the second defendant failed for lack of evidence of any binding contract or breach.

Parties
Claimant: Kamran Zabihi; First Defendant: Mahmood Janzemini; Second Defendant: Yousef Massodipour; Third Defendant: Alounak Kebab Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 November 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment After Full Trial
Outcome
Claim for conversion of jewellery succeeds against the first defendant; all other claims and counterclaims dismissed except for the first defendant's claim for £20,000, which succeeds.
Legal Topics
Conversion, Breach of Contract, Damages, Bailment, Fraud, Limitation of Actions
Civil Procedure Contract Law Tort Law Conversion Breach of Contract Damages Bailment Fraud +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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kamran Zabihi

Claimant

Mahmood Janzemini

First Defendant

Yousef Massodipour

Second Defendant

Alounak Kebab Limited

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment After Full Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the jewellery handed over by the claimant to the first defendant was converted and, if so, its value; Whether the first defendant is liable to account for the jewellery or its proceeds; Whether the second defendant is contractually liable for the jewellery; Whether the counterclaims and monetary claims by the defendants succeed; Whether the claimant's documentary evidence is genuine or fabricated.

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant established that he entrusted four sets of diamond and gold jewellery to the first defendant, who failed to return them or account for their proceeds. The court found the claimant's documentary evidence (the Zandieh letter and related faxes) to be fabricated but accepted, on the balance of probabilities, that valuable jewellery was handed over and converted. The court assessed the open market value of the jewellery at £125,000. The claimant failed to prove his monetary claim for £70,000, and the first defendant succeeded on his counterclaim for £20,000. The claim against the second defendant failed for lack of evidence of any binding contract or breach.

Court Disposition

Claim for conversion of jewellery succeeds against the first defendant; all other claims and counterclaims dismissed except for the first defendant's claim for £20,000, which succeeds.

Orders

  • Judgment for the claimant against the first defendant for £125,000 for conversion of jewellery.
  • Judgment for the first defendant against the claimant for £20,000 on the monetary counterclaim.