I-Remit Incorporated v Far East Express Remittance Ltd [2006] EWHC 2051 (Ch) (01 August 2006)

I-Remit Incorporated v Far East Express Remittance Ltd [2006] EWHC 2051 (Ch) (01 August 2006)

The expert accountant's report is final and binding as agreed by the parties, subject only to manifest error. No manifest error was established, as Feer failed to prove that the database was inaccurate or that unauthorised transactions were included. The contractual warranty as to the accuracy of the data was not...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2006] EWHC 2051 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: I-Remit Incorporated; Defendant: Far East Express Remittance Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 August 2006
Procedural Posture
Commercial Contract Dispute / High Court Trial Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed; counterclaim dismissed
Legal Topics
Expert Determination, Finality of Expert Reports, Manifest Error, Remittance Services, Agency, Contractual Warranties
Contract Law Commercial Law Expert Determination Finality of Expert Reports Manifest Error Remittance Services Agency Contractual Warranties

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

I-Remit Incorporated

Claimant

Far East Express Remittance Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Contract Dispute / High Court Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the expert accountant's report is final and binding subject to manifest error
  2. 2 Whether the database provided by I-Remit was accurate and complete as warranted
  3. 3 Whether Feer owes the sum certified by the accountants or is entitled to a counterclaim for overpayment and service charges

Ratio Decidendi

The expert accountant's report is final and binding as agreed by the parties, subject only to manifest error. No manifest error was established, as Feer failed to prove that the database was inaccurate or that unauthorised transactions were included. The contractual warranty as to the accuracy of the data was not breached. Feer's counterclaim for overpayment and service charges fails on the evidence. I-Remit is entitled to judgment for the sum claimed.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed; counterclaim dismissed

Orders

  • Judgment for I-Remit Incorporated for £379,462.52 against Far East Express Remittance Ltd
  • Counterclaim by Far East Express Remittance Ltd dismissed