Singh v Yaqubi [2013] EWCA Civ 23 (29 January 2013)

Singh v Yaqubi [2013] EWCA Civ 23 (29 January 2013)

The appellant failed to provide specific and cogent evidence of reasonable need for a replacement Rolls Royce during the repair period; the judge was entitled to find that need had not been established and to dismiss the claim for hire charges.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2013] EWCA Civ 23
Parties
Appellant: Hardip Singh; Respondent: Rashed Yaqubi
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 January 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Hire Charges, Bias, Special Damages, Mitigation of Loss
Tort Civil Procedure Hire Charges Bias Special Damages Mitigation of Loss

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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hardip Singh

Appellant

Rashed Yaqubi

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge demonstrated apparent bias against the appellant
  2. 2 Whether the appellant established reasonable need for a replacement Rolls Royce during repair
  3. 3 Whether the appellant was entitled to recover hire charges as special damages

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant failed to provide specific and cogent evidence of reasonable need for a replacement Rolls Royce during the repair period; the judge was entitled to find that need had not been established and to dismiss the claim for hire charges.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed