Global Asset Capital, Inc & Anor v Aabar Block S.A.R.L. & Ors [2017] EWCA Civ 37 (01 February 2017)

Global Asset Capital, Inc & Anor v Aabar Block S.A.R.L. & Ors [2017] EWCA Civ 37 (01 February 2017)

No binding contract was concluded on 6 May 2015 because the Offer Letter was 'subject to contract', acceptance could not create a contract, subsequent communications showed ongoing negotiations and materially different terms, and the conditions precedent were not satisfied. The claim had no real prospects of success and summary judgment/strike out was appropriate.

Citation
[2017] EWCA Civ 37
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Global Asset Capital, Inc; Claimant/respondent: Glenn Maud; Defendant/appellant: Aabar Block S. A. R. L.; Defendant/appellant: Aabar Investments PJS; Third Defendant: Robert Tchenguiz
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 February 2017
Procedural Posture
Commercial Contract Dispute / Appeal From Summary Judgment/strike Out Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment entered for Aabar
Legal Topics
Formation of Contract, Subject to Contract, Summary Judgment, Strike Out, Conditions Precedent
Contract Law Commercial Law Formation of Contract Subject to Contract Summary Judgment Strike Out Conditions Precedent

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Global Asset Capital, Inc

Claimant/respondent

Glenn Maud

Claimant/respondent

Aabar Block S. A. R. L.

Defendant/appellant

Aabar Investments PJS

Defendant/appellant

Robert Tchenguiz

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Contract Dispute / Appeal From Summary Judgment/strike Out Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a binding contract was concluded on 6 May 2015
  2. 2 Whether 'subject to contract' status was waived
  3. 3 Whether conditions precedent were satisfied

Ratio Decidendi

No binding contract was concluded on 6 May 2015 because the Offer Letter was 'subject to contract', acceptance could not create a contract, subsequent communications showed ongoing negotiations and materially different terms, and the conditions precedent were not satisfied. The claim had no real prospects of success and summary judgment/strike out was appropriate.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment entered for Aabar

Orders

  • Summary dismissal/strike out of Global's claims against Aabar
  • No further case management conference pending appeal determination