Sandher v Pearson

Sandher v Pearson

The court held that there was no unjust enrichment because Mrs Pearson performed the terms of her contract, which required her to clear any restriction. The contract was not set aside, and the claim was not pleaded or argued as an unconscionable bargain at trial. Therefore, Mrs Pearson was not entitled to subrogation or recovery of the sums paid to Hedge Capital.

Parties
Appellant/defendant: Jatinder Sandher; Respondent/claimant: Janet Pearson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 November 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Unjust Enrichment, Subrogation, Unconscionable Bargain, Price Manipulation, Remedies
Equity Property Law Restitution Unjust Enrichment Subrogation Unconscionable Bargain Price Manipulation Remedies

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

Parties

Jatinder Sandher

Appellant/defendant

Janet Pearson

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant was unjustly enriched at the respondent's expense by the repayment of a charge using sale proceeds
  2. 2 Whether the respondent is entitled to be subrogated to the rights of Hedge Capital
  3. 3 Whether the transaction constituted an unconscionable bargain

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that there was no unjust enrichment because Mrs Pearson performed the terms of her contract, which required her to clear any restriction. The contract was not set aside, and the claim was not pleaded or argued as an unconscionable bargain at trial. Therefore, Mrs Pearson was not entitled to subrogation or recovery of the sums paid to Hedge Capital.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Application for permission to appeal on unconscionable bargain ground dismissed