Benourad v Compass Group Plc [2010] EWHC 1882 (QB) (29 July 2010)

Benourad v Compass Group Plc [2010] EWHC 1882 (QB) (29 July 2010)

No binding contract was concluded between the claimant and the defendant regarding commission for the KCC introduction, as essential terms were not agreed and any agreement was subject to execution of a formal written contract which never occurred. The claimant's restitutionary claim also fails as no compensatable benefit was conferred on the defendant by the claimant's introduction, and the arrangements between Compass subsidiaries and KCC were not shown to have resulted from the claimant's efforts.

Citation
[2010] EWHC 1882 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Tahar Benourad; Defendant: Compass Group PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 July 2010
Procedural Posture
Commercial Contract Dispute / Judgment After Trial on Liability
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Formation of Contract, Authority of Agents, Quantum Meruit, Ostensible Authority, Joint Venture Agreements, Commission Agreements
Contract Law Restitution Commercial Law Formation of Contract Authority of Agents Quantum Meruit Ostensible Authority Joint Venture Agreements +1 more

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 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tahar Benourad

Claimant

Compass Group PLC

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Contract Dispute / Judgment After Trial on Liability

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether negotiations and conduct resulted in a binding contract entitling the claimant to commission
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is entitled to a reasonable fee in restitution (quantum meruit)
  3. 3 Whether Mr Marrel had actual or ostensible authority to bind the defendant

Ratio Decidendi

No binding contract was concluded between the claimant and the defendant regarding commission for the KCC introduction, as essential terms were not agreed and any agreement was subject to execution of a formal written contract which never occurred. The claimant's restitutionary claim also fails as no compensatable benefit was conferred on the defendant by the claimant's introduction, and the arrangements between Compass subsidiaries and KCC were not shown to have resulted from the claimant's efforts.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Claim for contractual commission dismissed
  • Claim for quantum meruit dismissed