Sousou Connect Ltd v Abel [2026] EWHC 665 (Comm) (20 March 2026)

Sousou Connect Ltd v Abel [2026] EWHC 665 (Comm) (20 March 2026)

No binding oral contract was concluded between SCL and Dr Abel at Annabel's on 7 February 2023 for capital introduction services and a success fee. The evidence, including contemporaneous documents and subsequent negotiations, shows that terms were not agreed at that meeting or subsequently. SCL's services were...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2026] EWHC 665 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Sousou Connect Limited; Defendant: Michael Abel
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 March 2026
Procedural Posture
Commercial Claim / High Court Trial Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Oral Contracts, Quantum Meruit, Capital Introduction Agreements, Success Fees, Implied Terms, Restitution for Services Rendered
Contract Law Restitution Commercial Law Oral Contracts Quantum Meruit Capital Introduction Agreements Success Fees Implied Terms +1 more

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 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sousou Connect Limited

Claimant

Michael Abel

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Claim / High Court Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an oral contract (the 'Annabel's Agreement') was concluded between SCL and Dr Abel on 7 February 2023 for capital introduction services and success fee;
  2. 2 Whether SCL is entitled to a reasonable fee in contract or in restitution (quantum meruit) for introductions leading to investment in Greykite;
  3. 3 Whether SCL's services were the effective cause of Wafra's investment in Greykite;

Ratio Decidendi

No binding oral contract was concluded between SCL and Dr Abel at Annabel's on 7 February 2023 for capital introduction services and a success fee. The evidence, including contemporaneous documents and subsequent negotiations, shows that terms were not agreed at that meeting or subsequently. SCL's services were rendered in the hope of reaching agreement, but no concluded contract or enforceable promise arose. The claim in restitution also fails as Dr Abel did not freely accept services on the basis that a fee was due, and SCL's expectation of payment was not sufficiently communicated or accepted to ground a quantum meruit claim.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Claimant's claim for contractual and restitutionary payment is dismissed.
  • No order for payment of success fee or quantum meruit.