HRH Prince Khaled Bin Sultan Bin Abdulaziz Al Saud And & Anor v Gibbs & Anor [2022] EWHC 1052 (Comm) (28 April 2022)

HRH Prince Khaled Bin Sultan Bin Abdulaziz Al Saud And & Anor v Gibbs & Anor [2022] EWHC 1052 (Comm) (28 April 2022)

The 25 April 2018 letter, signed by the second claimant, satisfied the requirements of clause 1.3 of the settlement agreement, triggering the obligation to liquidate the portfolio and transfer proceeds to the designated account, regardless of the account holder's name. The first defendant's failure to do so constituted breach of contract, entitling the second claimant to damages to be assessed and an interim payment.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 1052 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: HRH Prince Khaled Bin Sultan Bin Abdulaziz Al Saud; Claimant: HRH Princess Deema Bint Sultan Bin Abdulaziz Al Saud; Defendant: Ronald William Gibbs; Defendant: Sunnydale Services Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 April 2022
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Summary Judgment Application / Summary Judgment and Interim Payment Application
Outcome
Summary judgment for the second claimant on the alternative claim; damages to be assessed; interim payment ordered; primary claims provisionally stayed pending further submissions.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Breach of Contract, Settlement Agreement, Construction of Contracts, Interim Payment, Breach of Trust
Contract Law Trusts Law Civil Procedure Summary Judgment Breach of Contract Settlement Agreement Construction of Contracts Interim Payment +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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

HRH Prince Khaled Bin Sultan Bin Abdulaziz Al Saud

Claimant

HRH Princess Deema Bint Sultan Bin Abdulaziz Al Saud

Claimant

Ronald William Gibbs

Defendant

Sunnydale Services Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Summary Judgment Application / Summary Judgment and Interim Payment Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the settlement agreement's machinery was triggered by the 25 April 2018 letter
  2. 2 Whether the first defendant breached the settlement agreement by failing to liquidate and transfer proceeds
  3. 3 Whether the account designated for payment needed to be in the name of the second claimant

Ratio Decidendi

The 25 April 2018 letter, signed by the second claimant, satisfied the requirements of clause 1.3 of the settlement agreement, triggering the obligation to liquidate the portfolio and transfer proceeds to the designated account, regardless of the account holder's name. The first defendant's failure to do so constituted breach of contract, entitling the second claimant to damages to be assessed and an interim payment.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment for the second claimant on the alternative claim; damages to be assessed; interim payment ordered; primary claims provisionally stayed pending further submissions.

Orders

  • Judgment for the second claimant for breach of the settlement agreement; damages to be assessed.
  • Interim payment to the second claimant in specified amounts for liquidated assets.