Christopher Gary Hoole v Meredith Charles Limited & Ors
[2024] EWHC 525 (Comm)
CW & CG Claims Limited v Clarkewood Limited & Anor.
25 November 2022
[2022] EWHC 2959 (Comm)
High Court
Two companies had a deal where one sent customers to the other for compensation claims. The second company didn't pay the first company fairly and hid it. A judge said the second company had to pay, but the agent who helped make the deal wasn't found guilty of wrongdoing.
Key Facts
- •CW & CG Claims Limited (CW Claims) introduced PPI and PBA claims to Clarkewood Limited (Clarkewood), a CMC.
- •A June 2017 agreement (June Agreement) governed their relationship, with terms disputed regarding the inclusion of RBS claims, additional claims, Plevin claims, and deduction of Clarkewood's overheads.
- •CW Claims alleged breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, and fraud by Clarkewood, and unlawful procurement of breach of contract by Masum Mohammed (Mr. Mohammed), Clarkewood's agent.
- •Disputes centered on the interpretation of the June Agreement, particularly what was expressly agreed and what should be implied.
- •CW Claims alleged fraudulent manipulation of Clarkewood's BrightOffice CRM system to conceal breaches.
- •Expert evidence conflicted regarding industry norms for claim conversion rates.
Legal Principles
Test for implying terms into a contract (strict necessity for business efficacy)
Marks and Spencer plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Company (Jersey) Limited [2015] UKSC 72
Standard of proof in civil cases (balance of probabilities, with consideration of the seriousness of the allegation)
In re B (Children) (Care Proceedings: Standard of Proof) [2008] UKHL 35
Assessment of witness reliability (limited weight on memory of conversations, emphasis on documentary evidence)
Gestmin SGPS S.A. v Credit Suisse Limited [2013] EWHC 3560 (Comm)
Liability for procuring breach of contract (causation and intention)
OBG Ltd v Allan [2008] 1 AC 1
Liability of an agent procuring breach of contract (generally not liable if acting within the scope of agency)
Said v Butt [1920] 3 KB 497
Outcomes
CW Claims' breach of contract claim against Clarkewood succeeds.
Clarkewood failed to account to CW Claims for its share of commissions from all successful claims (including RBS, additional, and Plevin claims) as per the June Agreement, and deliberately manipulated BrightOffice data.
An account and inquiry is ordered to determine the amount owed to CW Claims by Clarkewood.
Insufficient evidence to determine the exact amount due; an inquiry is needed to assess the impact of data manipulation.
CW Claims' claim for unlawful procurement of breach of contract against Mr. Mohammed is dismissed.
Insufficient evidence to establish that Mr. Mohammed knowingly misrepresented the June Agreement's terms to Clarkewood with the intention of procuring a breach.