Marsfield Automotive Inc v Siddiqi [2017] EWHC 187 (Comm) (10 February 2017)
Summary judgment refused because Defendant has a real prospect of success on defences including contract by conduct, partial failure of consideration, counter-restitution, and ministerial receipt; these defences require factual determination and are not suitable for summary judgment.
- Citation
- [2017] EWHC 187 (Comm)
- Parties
- Claimant: Marsfield Automotive Inc; Defendant: Kamal Siddiqi
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 10 February 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Commercial Court Claim for Restitution / Summary Judgment Application
- Outcome
- Application for summary judgment dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Summary Judgment, Failure of Consideration, Ministerial Receipt, Counter Restitution, Contract by Conduct
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Marsfield Automotive Inc
Claimant
Kamal Siddiqi
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Claim for Restitution / Summary Judgment Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether summary judgment should be granted for restitution of £50m paid by Claimant to Defendant
- 2 Whether a binding contract existed by conduct
- 3 Whether there was a total failure of consideration or basis
Ratio Decidendi
Summary judgment refused because Defendant has a real prospect of success on defences including contract by conduct, partial failure of consideration, counter-restitution, and ministerial receipt; these defences require factual determination and are not suitable for summary judgment.
Court Disposition
Application for summary judgment dismissed
Orders
- No conditional order made
- Claim proceeds to trial
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment