Hamid Nawaz-Khan & Ors v UAP Limited
Claims Provision and Deferred Fee Income do not represent assets and should not be included in the Purchase Price; the Expert Determination was manifestly erroneous and not binding; rectification is granted for unilateral mistake; estoppel applies; breach of warranty found regarding accounting standards but not aged debts.
- Parties
- Claimant: Hamid Nawaz-Khan; Claimant: Timothy Williams; Claimant: Patricia Nawaz-Khan; Defendant: UAP Limited
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 18 March 2026
- Procedural Posture
- Commercial / Final Judgment After Trial
- Outcome
- Claim dismissed; counterclaim partially succeeds
- Legal Topics
- Share Purchase Agreement, Rectification, Estoppel, Misrepresentation, Breach of Warranty, Accounting Standards
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Hamid Nawaz-Khan
Claimant
Timothy Williams
Claimant
Patricia Nawaz-Khan
Claimant
UAP Limited
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Commercial / Final Judgment After Trial
Legal Issues
- 1 Proper construction of Purchase Price formula under SPA
- 2 Binding effect of Expert Determination
- 3 Rectification for unilateral mistake
Ratio Decidendi
Claims Provision and Deferred Fee Income do not represent assets and should not be included in the Purchase Price; the Expert Determination was manifestly erroneous and not binding; rectification is granted for unilateral mistake; estoppel applies; breach of warranty found regarding accounting standards but not aged debts.
Court Disposition
Claim dismissed; counterclaim partially succeeds
Orders
- Purchase Price to exclude Claims Provision and Deferred Fee Income
- Rectification of SPA to clarify only assets are included
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