Lloyd v Hayward & Anor [2025] EWHC 2226 (Ch) (27 August 2025)

Lloyd v Hayward & Anor [2025] EWHC 2226 (Ch) (27 August 2025)

The joint venture was between Mr Lloyd and Sirocco Holdings Limited, not Mr Hayward personally. The arrangement did not constitute a partnership under the Partnership Act 1890 as the parties were not carrying on a business in common. The terms of the joint venture included the deduction of mortgage interest as an expense before profit sharing. The joint venture was terminated by Sirocco in December 2013 due to Mr Lloyd's inability to perform his duties while in custody. Accordingly, Mr Lloyd's claims are statute-barred under the Limitation Act 1980. The counterclaims for vehicle leasing costs are to be addressed separately.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 2226 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Craig Lloyd; First Defendant: Richard Hayward; Second Defendant: Sirocco Holdings Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 August 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Business/partnership Dispute / Judgment on Liability, Quantum Reserved
Outcome
Claim dismissed as statute-barred; counterclaims reserved for later determination
Legal Topics
Joint Venture, Partnership Formation, Breach of Contract, Accounting for Profits, Limitation of Actions
Commercial Law Partnership Law Contract Law Joint Venture Partnership Formation Breach of Contract Accounting for Profits Limitation of Actions

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Craig Lloyd

Claimant

Richard Hayward

First Defendant

Sirocco Holdings Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Business/partnership Dispute / Judgment on Liability, Quantum Reserved

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the joint venture was with Richard Hayward personally or Sirocco Holdings Limited
  2. 2 Whether the joint venture constituted a partnership under the Partnership Act 1890
  3. 3 What were the terms of the joint venture, including profit sharing and allocation of expenses

Ratio Decidendi

The joint venture was between Mr Lloyd and Sirocco Holdings Limited, not Mr Hayward personally. The arrangement did not constitute a partnership under the Partnership Act 1890 as the parties were not carrying on a business in common. The terms of the joint venture included the deduction of mortgage interest as an expense before profit sharing. The joint venture was terminated by Sirocco in December 2013 due to Mr Lloyd's inability to perform his duties while in custody. Accordingly, Mr Lloyd's claims are statute-barred under the Limitation Act 1980. The counterclaims for vehicle leasing costs are to be addressed separately.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed as statute-barred; counterclaims reserved for later determination

Orders

  • Claim for account of profits or damages dismissed
  • Counterclaims for vehicle leasing costs to be determined at a later hearing