Sidhu v Rathor

Sidhu v Rathor

The court found, on the balance of probabilities and on the strength of contemporaneous documents and credible oral evidence, that Jaswant Sidhu made a £60,000 loan to Dr Rathor, which was repaid, and that a partnership existed between them from June/July 2015 until dissolution in October 2017. All salary increases, bonuses, cash withdrawals, and cheque payments to Jaswant and Sareet were authorised by Dr Rathor. Dr Rathor’s counterclaims for fraud, breach of duty, and unjust enrichment were dismissed as unproven and motivated by a breakdown in the parties’ relationship. The partnership is to be dissolved and accounts taken.

Parties
Claimant: Jaswant Sidhu; Defendant: Dr Sangeeta Rathor; Additional Part 20 Claimant: Natio Health Care (UK) Limited; Additional Part 20 Defendant: Sareet Sidhu
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil (partnership/employment/commercial) / Final Judgment After Full Trial
Outcome
Claimant’s claim for declaration of partnership, dissolution, and accounts succeeds; all counterclaims and additional claims by Dr Rathor and Natio Health Care (UK) Limited are dismissed; Sareet Sidhu’s counterclaim for unpaid salary succeeds.
Legal Topics
Existence and Dissolution of Partnership, Repayment of Loan, Employment Status and Salary Increases, Unjust Enrichment, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Res Judicata/issue Estoppel
Partnership Law Employment Law Commercial Law Existence and Dissolution of Partnership Repayment of Loan Employment Status and Salary Increases Unjust Enrichment Breach of Fiduciary Duty +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 5 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jaswant Sidhu

Claimant

Dr Sangeeta Rathor

Defendant

Natio Health Care (UK) Limited

Additional Part 20 Claimant

Sareet Sidhu

Additional Part 20 Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (partnership/employment/commercial) / Final Judgment After Full Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a partnership existed between Jaswant Sidhu and Dr Sangeeta Rathor under the Partnership Act 1890
  2. 2 Whether Jaswant Sidhu made a loan of £60,000 to Dr Rathor and if so, whether it was repaid
  3. 3 Whether salary increases and bonus payments to Jaswant and Sareet Sidhu were authorised

Ratio Decidendi

The court found, on the balance of probabilities and on the strength of contemporaneous documents and credible oral evidence, that Jaswant Sidhu made a £60,000 loan to Dr Rathor, which was repaid, and that a partnership existed between them from June/July 2015 until dissolution in October 2017. All salary increases, bonuses, cash withdrawals, and cheque payments to Jaswant and Sareet were authorised by Dr Rathor. Dr Rathor’s counterclaims for fraud, breach of duty, and unjust enrichment were dismissed as unproven and motivated by a breakdown in the parties’ relationship. The partnership is to be dissolved and accounts taken.

Court Disposition

Claimant’s claim for declaration of partnership, dissolution, and accounts succeeds; all counterclaims and additional claims by Dr Rathor and Natio Health Care (UK) Limited are dismissed; Sareet Sidhu’s counterclaim for unpaid salary succeeds.

Orders

  • Declaration that a partnership existed between Jaswant Sidhu and Dr Sangeeta Rathor from June/July 2015 to 4 October 2017
  • Order for dissolution and taking of partnership accounts and inquiries