Nathan v Smilovitch & Anor [2002] EWCA Civ 332 (1 March 2002)

Nathan v Smilovitch & Anor [2002] EWCA Civ 332 (1 March 2002)

There is a real prospect of success on appeal because the judge's findings were based on inferences from surrounding circumstances, and the applicant's arguments regarding the profit-sharing arrangements and lack of investment by AN merit consideration by the appellate court.

Citation
[2002] EWCA Civ 332
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Aharon Nathan; First Defendant/applicant: Zvi Smilovitch; Second Defendant: Queenscroft Investments Inc
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 March 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Permission to appeal granted
Legal Topics
Joint Venture, Appeal Permission, Findings of Fact, Profit Sharing

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

Parties

Aharon Nathan

Claimant/respondent

Zvi Smilovitch

First Defendant/applicant

Queenscroft Investments Inc

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the properties in question formed part of the joint venture between the parties
  2. 2 Whether the judge's findings of fact regarding the joint venture and profit sharing arrangements were correct

Ratio Decidendi

There is a real prospect of success on appeal because the judge's findings were based on inferences from surrounding circumstances, and the applicant's arguments regarding the profit-sharing arrangements and lack of investment by AN merit consideration by the appellate court.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal granted

Orders

  • Application for permission to appeal granted
  • Costs of the application to be costs in the appeal