Man & Anor v Hazelend LLP [2023] EWHC 221 (Comm) (10 February 2023)

Man & Anor v Hazelend LLP [2023] EWHC 221 (Comm) (10 February 2023)

The counterclaim for rectification is arguable and must go to trial; the defence based on the alleged 2019 oral variation is unarguable and is dismissed; the limitation defence is arguable and must go to trial. There is no compelling reason to allow the unarguable 2019 variation issue to proceed to trial.

Citation
[2023] EWHC 221 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: David Man; Claimant: Sandford Electrical Services Limited; Defendant: Hazelend LLP
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 February 2023
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Claim for Summary Judgment and Related Counterclaims / Summary Judgment Application; Interlocutory Stage
Outcome
Partial summary judgment granted for Claimants; certain defences and counterclaims dismissed; remainder to proceed to trial.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Rectification of Contract, Assignment of Debt, Limitation Periods, Oral Variation, Authority of Agents
Contract Law Civil Procedure Summary Judgment Rectification of Contract Assignment of Debt Limitation Periods Oral Variation Authority of Agents

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Man

Claimant

Sandford Electrical Services Limited

Claimant

Hazelend LLP

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Claim for Summary Judgment and Related Counterclaims / Summary Judgment Application; Interlocutory Stage

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the counterclaim for rectification of the Written Assignment has a real prospect of success
  2. 2 Whether the alleged 2019 oral variation defence has a real prospect of success
  3. 3 Whether the limitation defence has a real prospect of success

Ratio Decidendi

The counterclaim for rectification is arguable and must go to trial; the defence based on the alleged 2019 oral variation is unarguable and is dismissed; the limitation defence is arguable and must go to trial. There is no compelling reason to allow the unarguable 2019 variation issue to proceed to trial.

Court Disposition

Partial summary judgment granted for Claimants; certain defences and counterclaims dismissed; remainder to proceed to trial.

Orders

  • Hazelend's Defence based on the alleged 2019 Variation is dismissed.
  • Hazelend's counterclaim for a declaration that the Written Assignment was varied in accordance with the alleged 2019 Variation is dismissed.