Ahmed v Khalifa

Ahmed v Khalifa

The claimant failed to prove the existence of a binding oral contract on the alleged terms. The evidence was inconsistent with contemporaneous documents, inherent probabilities, and lacked credibility. No agreement for exclusivity, payment terms, or TOIFA sponsorship was established. Payments made were haphazard and not referable to the alleged contract. The claims are dismissed.

Parties
Claimant: Ahmed Adel Abdallah Ahmed; Claimant: CBSC Events & Exhibition and Conference Organizers; Defendant: Sheikh Hamad Isa Ali Al Khalifa
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 January 2019
Procedural Posture
Commercial / Final Judgment
Outcome
claims dismissed
Legal Topics
Oral Contracts, Agency, Quantum Meruit, Termination, Damages, Exclusivity, Commercial Agreements
Contract Law Oral Contracts Agency Quantum Meruit Termination Damages Exclusivity Commercial Agreements

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 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ahmed Adel Abdallah Ahmed

Claimant

CBSC Events & Exhibition and Conference Organizers

Claimant

Sheikh Hamad Isa Ali Al Khalifa

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a binding oral contract was concluded on 7 January 2016 for arranging meetings with Bollywood stars and payment terms
  2. 2 Whether the claimant was appointed as exclusive agent
  3. 3 Whether the defendant repudiated the contract and owed damages for meetings not arranged

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to prove the existence of a binding oral contract on the alleged terms. The evidence was inconsistent with contemporaneous documents, inherent probabilities, and lacked credibility. No agreement for exclusivity, payment terms, or TOIFA sponsorship was established. Payments made were haphazard and not referable to the alleged contract. The claims are dismissed.

Court Disposition

claims dismissed