Auckland v Khan & Anor

Auckland v Khan & Anor

The Recorder was entitled to find that Mr Jumma had authority to commit the appellant to the loan contract, based on the evidence of family arrangements, the appellant's own statements, and the credibility findings. The failure to put the agency point directly to the appellant in cross-examination was not fatal, as the issue was sufficiently addressed and the Recorder's findings were not challenged.

Parties
Appellant: Stephen Auckland; Respondent: Imran Khan; Respondent: Mohammed Rashad Khan
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 February 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Authority of Agent, Pleadings, Cross Examination, Findings of Fact
Contract Law Agency Law Authority of Agent Pleadings Cross Examination Findings of Fact

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 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stephen Auckland

Appellant

Imran Khan

Respondent

Mohammed Rashad Khan

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr Jumma had authority to commit the appellant to a loan contract with the respondent
  2. 2 Whether the existence of such authority was properly put to the appellant in cross-examination

Ratio Decidendi

The Recorder was entitled to find that Mr Jumma had authority to commit the appellant to the loan contract, based on the evidence of family arrangements, the appellant's own statements, and the credibility findings. The failure to put the agency point directly to the appellant in cross-examination was not fatal, as the issue was sufficiently addressed and the Recorder's findings were not challenged.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed