Yedina v Yedin & Anor [2017] EWHC 3319 (Ch) (15 December 2017)

Yedina v Yedin & Anor [2017] EWHC 3319 (Ch) (15 December 2017)

The 2009 Deed is enforceable against Mr Yedin; his defences of non est factum, undue influence, and unconscionable bargain fail on the facts. Mrs Yedina is entitled to damages for repudiation. Mr Yedin is not the beneficial owner of Skelling Ltd or Flat 2B, so Mrs Yedina cannot enforce judgment against those proceeds. The counterclaim that Mrs Yedina holds foreign properties on trust for Mr Yedin and the children is dismissed.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 3319 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Iryna Yedina; Defendant: Oleksander Yedin; Defendant: Skelling Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 December 2017
Procedural Posture
Chancery Division Civil Claim / Final Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim for damages for repudiation of the Deed succeeds; enforcement against Skelling Ltd/Flat 2B fails; counterclaim for trust declarations dismissed.
Legal Topics
Enforcement of Deed, Repudiation and Damages, Beneficial Ownership, Resulting Trusts, Non Est Factum, Undue Influence, Unconscionable Bargain, Freezing Orders
Contract Law Trusts Law Property Law Enforcement of Deed Repudiation and Damages Beneficial Ownership Resulting Trusts Non Est Factum +3 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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Iryna Yedina

Claimant

Oleksander Yedin

Defendant

Skelling Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Chancery Division Civil Claim / Final Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 2009 Deed is enforceable against Mr Yedin
  2. 2 Whether Mr Yedin is beneficial owner of Skelling Ltd and proceeds of sale of Flat 2B
  3. 3 Whether Mrs Yedina holds certain properties on trust for Mr Yedin and their children

Ratio Decidendi

The 2009 Deed is enforceable against Mr Yedin; his defences of non est factum, undue influence, and unconscionable bargain fail on the facts. Mrs Yedina is entitled to damages for repudiation. Mr Yedin is not the beneficial owner of Skelling Ltd or Flat 2B, so Mrs Yedina cannot enforce judgment against those proceeds. The counterclaim that Mrs Yedina holds foreign properties on trust for Mr Yedin and the children is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim for damages for repudiation of the Deed succeeds; enforcement against Skelling Ltd/Flat 2B fails; counterclaim for trust declarations dismissed.

Orders

  • Mr Yedin to pay damages to Mrs Yedina for breach of the Deed.
  • Claim to enforce against proceeds of Flat 2B and Skelling Ltd dismissed.