Legal News

Failure to call witnesses, reliance upon fraudulent misrepresentations and penalty interest (Ahuja Investments Ltd v Victorygame Ltd and Pandher)

Published on: 07 September 2021
Published by: LexisPSL
  • Failure to call witnesses, reliance upon fraudulent misrepresentations and penalty interest (Ahuja Investments Ltd v Victorygame Ltd and Pandher)
  • What are the practical implications of this case?
  • What was the background?
  • What did the court decide?
  • Failure to call witnesses and the impact of adverse inferences
  • Penalty interest
  • Case details

Article summary

Commercial analysis: This case is useful reading for practitioners on three grounds. Firstly, the judgment provides a useful summary of the court’s approach to drawing inferences and making factual findings in the absence of key witnesses. Secondly, the judgment is a rare example of a defendant successfully discharging the burden of proving non-reliance upon an admittedly incorrect representation. Thirdly, in his judgment His Honour Judge Hodge QC disallowed a claim for contractual interest on the basis that it was an unenforceable penalty, and may be deployed in future as a touchstone example for inappropriate levels of interest. Written by Ryan Turner, barrister at Lamb Chambers. or take a trial to read the full analysis.

Popular documents