Erith Holdings Ltd & Ors v Murphy
The Works Agreement was between Erith Holdings and MWL, not Mr Murphy personally. There was no enforceable personal guarantee or indemnity by Mr Murphy, and the loan was made to MWL. No clear admission of personal liability was made by Mr Murphy or his solicitors. The existence of a contract with MWL precluded a claim for unjust enrichment against Mr Murphy.
- Parties
- Claimant: Erith Holdings Limited; Claimant: Erith Haulage Company Limited; Claimant: Erith Plant Services Limited; Defendant: Ronald William Murphy
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 08 June 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Civil / Judgment After Trial
- Outcome
- Claim dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Personal Guarantee, Indemnity, Unjust Enrichment, Oral Contracts, Company Law
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Erith Holdings Limited
Claimant
Erith Haulage Company Limited
Claimant
Erith Plant Services Limited
Claimant
Ronald William Murphy
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment After Trial
Legal Issues
- 1 Was the Works Agreement made with MWL or Mr Murphy personally?
- 2 Did the parties enter into a Revised Works Agreement with personal liability for Mr Murphy?
- 3 Did Mr Murphy give an enforceable personal indemnity or guarantee?
Ratio Decidendi
The Works Agreement was between Erith Holdings and MWL, not Mr Murphy personally. There was no enforceable personal guarantee or indemnity by Mr Murphy, and the loan was made to MWL. No clear admission of personal liability was made by Mr Murphy or his solicitors. The existence of a contract with MWL precluded a claim for unjust enrichment against Mr Murphy.
Court Disposition
Claim dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment