Leonard Curtis & Co (a firm) v Benjamin

Leonard Curtis & Co (a firm) v Benjamin

The court found the defendant fraudulently obtained £78,000 via the Autopay system and £29,400 via double cheque payments, deliberately concealing these from the partners. The evidence of the partners was preferred over the defendant's, who had a conviction for dishonesty and made unsubstantiated allegations. The overcharging claim was not proved to the required standard. Judgment was entered for the claimant for £107,400, with interest and costs to be determined.

Parties
Claimant: Leonard Curtis & Co (A Firm); Defendant: Michael Benjamin
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 October 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for claimant in the sum of £107,400; interest and costs awarded; overcharging claim dismissed; proprietary and compound interest remedies reserved for further hearing.
Legal Topics
Employee Fraud, Breach of Trust, Accounting Fraud, Costs, Interest on Judgment, Tracing Remedies
Fraud Contract Civil Procedure Employee Fraud Breach of Trust Accounting Fraud Costs Interest on Judgment +1 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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Leonard Curtis & Co (A Firm)

Claimant

Michael Benjamin

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant fraudulently obtained payments from the claimant via the Autopay system and double cheque payments
  2. 2 Whether the defendant overcharged the claimant for services rendered
  3. 3 Whether the claimant is entitled to recover the sums paid, interest, and pursue proprietary remedies

Ratio Decidendi

The court found the defendant fraudulently obtained £78,000 via the Autopay system and £29,400 via double cheque payments, deliberately concealing these from the partners. The evidence of the partners was preferred over the defendant's, who had a conviction for dishonesty and made unsubstantiated allegations. The overcharging claim was not proved to the required standard. Judgment was entered for the claimant for £107,400, with interest and costs to be determined.

Court Disposition

Judgment for claimant in the sum of £107,400; interest and costs awarded; overcharging claim dismissed; proprietary and compound interest remedies reserved for further hearing.

Orders

  • Defendant to pay claimant £107,400 for Autopay and professional fees frauds
  • Interest to be assessed under section 35A Supreme Court Act or as otherwise ordered, with liberty to apply for a different rate