Tariq Mahmood Malik v Mahboob Hussain Jr & Ors

Tariq Mahmood Malik v Mahboob Hussain Jr & Ors

Clause 5.4 of the Sale Mechanism requires the bidder to exchange contracts within 7 days of being presented with contracts capable of exchange, not within 7 days of deposit payment regardless of contract readiness. Usman was not in breach, his deposit was not forfeit, and the contract to sell the partnership assets to him remained valid. The failure to exchange was due to the Partners’ delay and lack of co-operation, not Usman’s fault. The sale to Usman should be enforced, subject to him paying the balance of the purchase price within 7 days.

Parties
Appellant: Tariq Mahmood Malik; First Respondent: Mahboob Hussain Jr; Second Respondent: Usman Hussain Malik; Third Respondent: Thomas Cunningham
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 January 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Partnership Dissolution, Court Ordered Sale, Specific Performance, Contract Interpretation, Duty of Co Operation
Commercial Law Partnership Law Equity Partnership Dissolution Court Ordered Sale Specific Performance Contract Interpretation Duty of Co Operation

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tariq Mahmood Malik

Appellant

Mahboob Hussain Jr

First Respondent

Usman Hussain Malik

Second Respondent

Thomas Cunningham

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Proper construction of clause 5.4 of the Sale Mechanism
  2. 2 Whether Usman's bid and deposit were invalidated by failure to exchange contracts within 7 days
  3. 3 Implication and breach of duty of co-operation

Ratio Decidendi

Clause 5.4 of the Sale Mechanism requires the bidder to exchange contracts within 7 days of being presented with contracts capable of exchange, not within 7 days of deposit payment regardless of contract readiness. Usman was not in breach, his deposit was not forfeit, and the contract to sell the partnership assets to him remained valid. The failure to exchange was due to the Partners’ delay and lack of co-operation, not Usman’s fault. The sale to Usman should be enforced, subject to him paying the balance of the purchase price within 7 days.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Declaration that Usman was not in breach of clause 5.4, his deposit was not forfeit, and the contract to sell the partnership assets to him did not become invalid.
  • Usman to pay the balance of the purchase price (£4,300,000 less deposit) to Blacks within 7 days of the order.