Choksi v IPS Law LLP [2025] EWHC 2804 (Ch) (04 November 2025)

Choksi v IPS Law LLP [2025] EWHC 2804 (Ch) (04 November 2025)

The construction of the BLA is ambiguous and raises real questions as to whether IPS Law LLP was contractually or as trustee obliged to retain and return the claimant's funds, or whether it could act on Biodex's instructions. These uncertainties mean the construction issue must go to trial. IPS's arguments on variation, acquiescence, or estoppel are fanciful and unsupported by evidence, but the summary judgment application fails because the construction issue is not suitable for summary determination.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 2804 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Mihir Vijay Choksi; Defendant: IPS Law LLP
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 November 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil (chancery Division, Business and Property Courts) / Summary Judgment Application
Outcome
Summary judgment refused; matter to proceed to trial.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Escrow Arrangements, Quistclose Trust, Contractual Construction, Variation and Estoppel, Breach of Trust, Legal Professional Obligations
Contract Law Equity and Trusts Civil Procedure Summary Judgment Escrow Arrangements Quistclose Trust Contractual Construction Variation and Estoppel +2 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 4 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mihir Vijay Choksi

Claimant

IPS Law LLP

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (chancery Division, Business and Property Courts) / Summary Judgment Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Bridging Loan Agreement (BLA) imposed binding contractual or trust obligations on IPS Law LLP to retain and return the claimant's funds
  2. 2 Whether IPS Law LLP breached those obligations by paying out the funds at Biodex's direction
  3. 3 Whether any variation, acquiescence, or estoppel prevents the claimant from enforcing the original terms of the BLA

Ratio Decidendi

The construction of the BLA is ambiguous and raises real questions as to whether IPS Law LLP was contractually or as trustee obliged to retain and return the claimant's funds, or whether it could act on Biodex's instructions. These uncertainties mean the construction issue must go to trial. IPS's arguments on variation, acquiescence, or estoppel are fanciful and unsupported by evidence, but the summary judgment application fails because the construction issue is not suitable for summary determination.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment refused; matter to proceed to trial.

Orders

  • Application for summary judgment dismissed.
  • Directions for trial including disclosure and witness evidence.