Howell (t/a Town Base) v Virani [2001] EWCA Civ 1515 (5 October 2001)

Howell (t/a Town Base) v Virani [2001] EWCA Civ 1515 (5 October 2001)

The trial judge was entitled to find, on the evidence, that there was no agreement for additional fees beyond the initial £910, and to prefer the defendant's credibility. The judge's findings on all claims and counterclaims were reasoned and unassailable on appeal. No procedural unfairness or error was established.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 1515
Parties
Claimant: Mark Howell T/A Town Base; Defendant: Shaileen Virani
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 October 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal (court of Appeal)
Outcome
Application for permission to appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Agency Fees, Counterclaim, Damages, Credibility of Witnesses, Appeal Grounds
Contract Law Civil Procedure Agency Fees Counterclaim Damages Credibility of Witnesses Appeal Grounds

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mark Howell T/A Town Base

Claimant

Shaileen Virani

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal (court of Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant was entitled to additional agency fees beyond the agreed sum
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred in assessing credibility and procedural fairness
  3. 3 Whether the claimant's claims for damages, defamation, harassment, and loss of profits were substantiated

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge was entitled to find, on the evidence, that there was no agreement for additional fees beyond the initial £910, and to prefer the defendant's credibility. The judge's findings on all claims and counterclaims were reasoned and unassailable on appeal. No procedural unfairness or error was established.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No order for costs