header-logo header-logo

10 February 2017
Issue: 7733 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Misrepresentation

Eden v Parker; Eden v Parker and another [2016] EWHC 3302 (Ch), [2016] All ER (D) 123 (Dec)

The Chancery Division held that, on the facts, the defendant property developer, who had entered into a joint venture with the claimant solicitor for the purchase and renovation of terraced properties, was not liable for excess renovation costs. The court also ruled on the claimant’s unfair prejudice petition in relation to the affairs of a limited liability partnership (the LLP), through which the properties had been purchased and through which the defendant had managed the renovation of the properties. It held that the defendant had not deliberately misapplied or diverted substantial or any money provided by the claimant for the purpose of the renovation works. The defendant admitted some liability to give account to the LLP and the court ordered that he was liable to account in certain respects.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Burgess Mee—Victoria Sterritt

Burgess Mee—Victoria Sterritt

Family law boutique expands London team with legal director hire

Ward Hadaway—Mike Gore

Ward Hadaway—Mike Gore

Firm enhances advisory capability with strategic risk specialist hire

Stewarts—Alexandra Lyons

Stewarts—Alexandra Lyons

Insurance and reinsurance specialist joins policyholder disputes practice as partner

NEWS
Some employment law controversies never disappear—they merely lie dormant
Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming legal practice, but its successful adoption depends as much on culture as technology
The fallout from Lord Mandelson’s appointment and dismissal as UK ambassador to Washington raises profound questions about constitutional governance, accountability and political appointments
Pastries may be in the firing line while kebabs escape scrutiny, but the reality is far more nuanced
The Supreme Court’s decision in Dillon highlights a central tension in modern public law: rights may be recognised without being fully realised
back-to-top-scroll