Docklock Limited v C Christo & Co Limited

Docklock Limited v C Christo & Co Limited

Christo was not entitled to credit for the October Disbursements except to the extent they exceeded the £134,118.72 owed to Docklock on 1 October 2014, as the running account principle appropriated those payments to discharge pre-October 2014 liability, and neither the Moylan Order nor the WCIA justified retrospective reallocation.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: Docklock Limited; Defendant/respondent: C Christo & Co Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Running Accounts, Appropriation of Payments, Waiver of Claims, Account of Profits, Interpretation of Settlement Agreements
Civil Procedure Contract Law Family Law Running Accounts Appropriation of Payments Waiver of Claims Account of Profits Interpretation of Settlement Agreements

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

Parties

Docklock Limited

Claimant/appellant

C Christo & Co Limited

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Christo was entitled to credit for October Disbursements when accounting for rent received between 1 October 2014 and 1 September 2016
  2. 2 Interpretation of the Moylan Order and Waiver of Claims and Indemnity Agreement (WCIA) regarding running accounts and appropriations

Ratio Decidendi

Christo was not entitled to credit for the October Disbursements except to the extent they exceeded the £134,118.72 owed to Docklock on 1 October 2014, as the running account principle appropriated those payments to discharge pre-October 2014 liability, and neither the Moylan Order nor the WCIA justified retrospective reallocation.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Paragraph 1 of the Judge’s order dated 30 January 2023 varied to reflect the sum due as £425,344.90 rather than £291,226.18