Gheewalla v Rasul & Ors [2022] EWHC 3180 (Ch) (12 December 2022)

Gheewalla v Rasul & Ors [2022] EWHC 3180 (Ch) (12 December 2022)

The claimant failed to prove the existence of the alleged oral consultancy agreements entitling him to a share of profits, but succeeded in establishing a quantum meruit claim for unjust enrichment for management services provided in relation to the 51 flats during the relevant period, as the defendants were enriched by these services, were aware of them, and had the opportunity to reject them.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 3180 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Shabbir Gheewalla; First Defendant: Saffana Rasul; Second Defendant (claim Discontinued): Akeela Ahmed; Third Defendant: Hidayat Ali Rasul
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 December 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil (business/property) / Trial on Liability Only
Outcome
Claim for breach of consultancy agreement dismissed; quantum meruit claim for unjust enrichment succeeds; quantum to be assessed at a further hearing.
Legal Topics
Quantum Meruit, Consultancy Agreements, Partnerships, Unjust Enrichment, Oral Agreements, Breach of Contract
Contract Law Equity Unjust Enrichment Quantum Meruit Consultancy Agreements Partnerships Oral Agreements Breach of Contract

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shabbir Gheewalla

Claimant

Saffana Rasul

First Defendant

Akeela Ahmed

Second Defendant (claim Discontinued)

Hidayat Ali Rasul

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (business/property) / Trial on Liability Only

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether oral consultancy agreements entitling the claimant to one-third of partnership profits existed and were breached
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is entitled to a quantum meruit award for services provided to the partnership

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to prove the existence of the alleged oral consultancy agreements entitling him to a share of profits, but succeeded in establishing a quantum meruit claim for unjust enrichment for management services provided in relation to the 51 flats during the relevant period, as the defendants were enriched by these services, were aware of them, and had the opportunity to reject them.

Court Disposition

Claim for breach of consultancy agreement dismissed; quantum meruit claim for unjust enrichment succeeds; quantum to be assessed at a further hearing.

Orders

  • Claim for breach of alleged consultancy agreements dismissed.
  • Claim against Third Defendant for inducing breach dismissed.