Al-Rawi v Sidawi & Ors [2023] EWHC 1415 (Ch) (12 June 2023)

Al-Rawi v Sidawi & Ors [2023] EWHC 1415 (Ch) (12 June 2023)

The court found that no binding oral contracts existed between the claimant and the defendants regarding profit shares in the property projects; dealings were based on trust and honour rather than legal obligation. The claimant's alternative claim for quantum meruit also failed as the court found no basis for such entitlement on the facts.

Citation
[2023] EWHC 1415 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Faris Al-Rawi; First Defendant: Sami Wadi Sidawi; Second Defendant: Wael Hourani; Third Defendant: Amal Hourani
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 June 2023
Procedural Posture
Commercial/contractual Dispute / Trial Judgment on Liability
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Existence of Binding Oral Contract, Profit Share Agreements, Quantum Meruit, Limitation Act 1980, Trusts and Beneficial Ownership
Contract Law Equity Property Law Existence of Binding Oral Contract Profit Share Agreements Quantum Meruit Limitation Act 1980 Trusts and Beneficial Ownership

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Faris Al-Rawi

Claimant

Sami Wadi Sidawi

First Defendant

Wael Hourani

Second Defendant

Amal Hourani

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial/contractual Dispute / Trial Judgment on Liability

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether binding oral contracts existed entitling the claimant to profit shares in four property projects
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is entitled to a quantum meruit if no contract exists
  3. 3 Whether the defendants are entitled to deduct interest on capital in profit calculations

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that no binding oral contracts existed between the claimant and the defendants regarding profit shares in the property projects; dealings were based on trust and honour rather than legal obligation. The claimant's alternative claim for quantum meruit also failed as the court found no basis for such entitlement on the facts.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • All claims by the claimant are dismissed
  • No entitlement to profit share or quantum meruit established