Benourad v Compass Group Plc [2010] EWHC 1882 (QB) (29 July 2010)
No binding commission contract was formed between claimant and defendant regarding KCC; claimant failed to prove agreement or ostensible authority of Mr Marrel to bind Compass Group PLC. Claimant not entitled to commission or quantum meruit as no compensatable benefit was conferred and no relevant revenue generated from alleged joint venture.
- Citation
- [2010] EWHC 1882
- Parties
- Claimant: Tahar Benourad; Defendant: Compass Group PLC
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 29 July 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Commercial Claim (contract/restitution) / High Court Judgment on Liability
- Outcome
- Claim dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Commission Agreements, Quantum Meruit, Authority of Agents, Joint Ventures, Unjust Enrichment
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Tahar Benourad
Claimant
Compass Group PLC
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Commercial Claim (contract/restitution) / High Court Judgment on Liability
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a binding commission contract was formed between claimant and defendant regarding KCC introduction
- 2 Whether claimant is entitled to commission or quantum meruit for services
- 3 Authority (actual/ostensible) of Mr Marrel to bind Compass Group PLC
Ratio Decidendi
No binding commission contract was formed between claimant and defendant regarding KCC; claimant failed to prove agreement or ostensible authority of Mr Marrel to bind Compass Group PLC. Claimant not entitled to commission or quantum meruit as no compensatable benefit was conferred and no relevant revenue generated from alleged joint venture.
Court Disposition
Claim dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment