DNA Productions (Europe) Ltd v Manoukian & Anor (t/a DNA Productions)

DNA Productions (Europe) Ltd v Manoukian & Anor (t/a DNA Productions)

There was no concluded contract between DNA and Manoukian on the terms alleged by DNA. DNA failed to establish that Manoukian agreed to an all-in contract, and the evidence showed Manoukian believed he was contracting on a cost plus basis with full disclosure of supplier discounts and commissions. DNA's concealment of commissions and discounts, and the absence of mutual agreement on material terms, meant DNA's claim must fail.

Parties
Claimant: DNA Productions (Europe) Limited; Defendant: Mr Rafi Manoukian; Third Party: Mr Matthew James (trading as DNA Productions)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 April 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Event Management Contracts, Secret Commissions, Fiduciary Duties, Misrepresentation, Disclosure Obligations
Contract Law Misrepresentation Event Management Contracts Secret Commissions Fiduciary Duties Disclosure Obligations

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

DNA Productions (Europe) Limited

Claimant

Mr Rafi Manoukian

Defendant

Mr Matthew James (trading as DNA Productions)

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the contract between DNA and Manoukian was an 'all-in' contract or a 'cost plus' contract
  2. 2 Whether DNA was entitled to receive undisclosed commissions or discounts from suppliers
  3. 3 Whether DNA breached fiduciary duties or contractual terms by concealing commissions

Ratio Decidendi

There was no concluded contract between DNA and Manoukian on the terms alleged by DNA. DNA failed to establish that Manoukian agreed to an all-in contract, and the evidence showed Manoukian believed he was contracting on a cost plus basis with full disclosure of supplier discounts and commissions. DNA's concealment of commissions and discounts, and the absence of mutual agreement on material terms, meant DNA's claim must fail.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed