Hodgson & Anor v Lipson [2009] EWHC 3111 (QB) (01 December 2009)

Hodgson & Anor v Lipson [2009] EWHC 3111 (QB) (01 December 2009)

The claimants' case that a substitute bargain was reached to pay a reasonable price for the completed work, in place of the original loan agreement with interest, was sufficiently definite and supported by consideration to have a realistic prospect of success at trial. The claim should not be struck out at this stage.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2009] EWHC 3111 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Maurice James Hodgson; Claimant: Miriam Hodgson; Defendant: Ellard Lipson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 December 2009
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal Against Summary Striking Out of Claim in Part; Application to Strike Out Remaining Claim
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; order of District Judge upheld
Legal Topics
Variation of Contract, Consideration, Promissory Estoppel, Equitable Forbearance, Enforceability of Agreements, Extortionate Credit Bargains
Contract Law Equity Consumer Credit Variation of Contract Consideration Promissory Estoppel Equitable Forbearance Enforceability of Agreements +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Maurice James Hodgson

Claimant

Miriam Hodgson

Claimant

Ellard Lipson

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal Against Summary Striking Out of Claim in Part; Application to Strike Out Remaining Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the alleged substitute bargain was sufficiently definite and certain to be enforceable
  2. 2 Whether consideration was given for the substitute bargain
  3. 3 Whether the claimants have a realistic prospect of success at trial

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants' case that a substitute bargain was reached to pay a reasonable price for the completed work, in place of the original loan agreement with interest, was sufficiently definite and supported by consideration to have a realistic prospect of success at trial. The claim should not be struck out at this stage.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; order of District Judge upheld

Orders

  • Claim to proceed to trial on the issue of the substitute bargain and enforceability
  • No further order regarding struck out paragraphs of the Particulars of Claim