Rahman v Rahman & Ors

Rahman v Rahman & Ors

The application to strike out is allowed because the defendant's case for a November 2010 valuation date is unsustainable as a matter of law, the disputed evidence is irrelevant or inadmissible as it seeks to re-litigate findings already made, and the evidence as to the claimant's conduct and breakdown in relations is either irrelevant, not properly pleaded, or would unfairly prejudice the trial. The proper valuation date for damages in lieu is the date of judgment or later, and the defendant is estopped from re-arguing issues already determined.

Parties
Claimant: Habibur Rahman; First Defendant: Azizur Rahman; Second Defendant: Icon College of Technology and Management Ltd; Third Defendant: Icon Technology (UK) Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 September 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Contract/company / Interlocutory Application (strike Out) Ruling
Outcome
Application to strike out allowed
Legal Topics
Damages in Lieu of Specific Performance, Assessment of Damages, Minority Shareholding Discount, Strike Out Applications, Issue Estoppel, Admissibility of Evidence
Contract Law Company Law Civil Procedure Damages in Lieu of Specific Performance Assessment of Damages Minority Shareholding Discount Strike Out Applications Issue Estoppel +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 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Habibur Rahman

Claimant

Azizur Rahman

First Defendant

Icon College of Technology and Management Ltd

Second Defendant

Icon Technology (UK) Ltd

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Contract/company / Interlocutory Application (strike Out) Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether certain passages in the Counterschedule and witness statements should be struck out as disclosing no reasonable grounds or as an abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether the valuation date for damages in lieu of specific performance should be November 2010 or a later date
  3. 3 Whether evidence relating to the breakdown of relations and claimant's conduct is admissible or relevant to the assessment of damages or minority discount

Ratio Decidendi

The application to strike out is allowed because the defendant's case for a November 2010 valuation date is unsustainable as a matter of law, the disputed evidence is irrelevant or inadmissible as it seeks to re-litigate findings already made, and the evidence as to the claimant's conduct and breakdown in relations is either irrelevant, not properly pleaded, or would unfairly prejudice the trial. The proper valuation date for damages in lieu is the date of judgment or later, and the defendant is estopped from re-arguing issues already determined.

Court Disposition

Application to strike out allowed

Orders

  • Paragraphs 6(d) and 20(c) of the Counterschedule struck out
  • Identified passages of the witness statements of Azizur Rahman, Dr Nabi, Mithra Dulloo, and Sue Hindley struck out