High Court dismisses claim over Forbes House project management fees

Introduction

The High Court recently adjudicated on a case involving Hume Street Management Consultants Limited (HSMC) and Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim Al-Thani, along with Lomakx Limited and Forbes House Limited, concerning claims for project management fees related to the redevelopment of Forbes House, one of London's largest private residences.

Background

The dispute arose when HSMC sought payment for services allegedly rendered in the renovation of Forbes House. The claimant asserted that an oral agreement or an agreement by conduct had been established with the defendants, entitling them to a reasonable sum for their services. The defendants, however, contested the existence of any such agreement.

Legal Proceedings

HSMC initially sought permission to serve the claim form out of the jurisdiction, which was granted by Pepperall, J in September 2024. The defendants subsequently applied to set aside this service, arguing that the claim lacked a serious issue to be tried.

Claims and Arguments

The claimant's case was based on two grounds: a contractual claim for unpaid project management services and an alternative restitutionary claim for unjust enrichment. The defendants argued that HSMC failed to establish a serious issue to be tried, as required by the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR).

Judgment

Deputy Judge Adrian Williamson KC found that HSMC had not demonstrated a real prospect of success in their claims. The court noted the claimant's failure to satisfy the pleading requirements for an oral contract or a contract made by conduct, as outlined in Practice Direction 16.

Service Out of Jurisdiction

The court concluded that the defendants' application to set aside the service out of jurisdiction was justified. The claimant's attempts to establish a contractual relationship with the defendants were deemed incoherent and lacking in substance.

Alternative Service

Regarding the alternative service on Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim Al-Thani, the court held that the usual delays in serving proceedings in Qatar did not constitute a good reason for authorising service by alternative means.

Conclusion

The High Court dismissed HSMC's claims, granting the defendants' application to set aside the service out of jurisdiction. The case underscores the importance of clear contractual arrangements and the challenges of establishing service out of jurisdiction.

Learn More

For more information on contractor law, see BeCivil's guide to Contractor Law.