Patrick v McKinley [2015] EWCA Civ 1582 (26 November 2015)

Patrick v McKinley [2015] EWCA Civ 1582 (26 November 2015)

Permission to appeal granted on grounds that it is arguable the trial judge failed to properly consider material evidence, mischaracterised the nature of the parties' relationship, and did not adequately address issues regarding destruction of evidence, credibility, and remuneration; applicant permitted to argue identified grounds before the full court.

Citation
[2015] EWCA Civ 1582
Parties
Applicant: Patrick; Respondent: McKinley
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 November 2015
Procedural Posture
Application for Permission to Appeal / Court of Appeal, Permission to Appeal From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Permission to appeal granted
Legal Topics
Beneficial Interest, Joint Venture, Partnership, Credibility of Witnesses, Adverse Inferences, Quantum Meruit, Disclosure of Evidence
Property Law Equity Civil Procedure Beneficial Interest Joint Venture Partnership Credibility of Witnesses Adverse Inferences +2 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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Patrick

Applicant

McKinley

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Permission to Appeal / Court of Appeal, Permission to Appeal From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether applicant had a beneficial interest in properties owned by respondent
  2. 2 Whether there was a property development joint venture or partnership
  3. 3 Whether respondent made promises or assurances regarding property interests

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to appeal granted on grounds that it is arguable the trial judge failed to properly consider material evidence, mischaracterised the nature of the parties' relationship, and did not adequately address issues regarding destruction of evidence, credibility, and remuneration; applicant permitted to argue identified grounds before the full court.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal granted

Orders

  • Applicant granted permission to appeal on specified grounds
  • Appeal limited to identified issues in judgment