After a successful High Court appeal, gunnercooke partner, Khaled Moyeed secures victory for client in a re-trial

gunnercooke partner Khaled Moyeed has secured a significant victory for the Defendant in Ahmed v Miah [2025] after a re-trial involving five witnesses over three days before His Honour Judge Holmes in the Central London County Court. The judge ruled in favour of the Defendant rejecting the Claimant’s assertion that a binding contract of compromise arose following an invalid arbitral award. The re-trial took place following a successful appeal in which the High Court overturned the original decision from December 2021 and remitted the case for a re-trial before a different judge.

The High Court criticised the trial judge’s refusal to adjourn the original December 2021 hearing in circumstances where the Defendant was self-isolating due to Covid symptoms and could not attend the trial to give evidence. The High Court decided that the trial judge should have considered remote hearing options to enable the Defendant to give evidence, emphasising the need to balance public health measures with access to justice. The High Court ordered a re-trial.

At the re-trial in January 2025, HHJ Holmes heard evidence from five witnesses of fact. The Claimant alleged that the Defendant defaulted on a loan agreement from 2016 and then refused to honour an arbitral award from 2018. The judge held that the arbitral award was invalid, but it could become a binding compromise agreement. He held:

“But does an invalid arbitral award become a binding contract of compromise if the parties endorse and agree the arbitral decision? As a matter of principle and subject to the elements of a binding contract of compromise being present and the absence of any defence such as undue influence, I cannot see why not.”

However, the judge found in favour of the Defendant because the compromise agreement could not be enforced due to lack of certainty. The parties had not agreed the amount in instalments that the Defendant would pay, the frequency of those instalments and the period of time over which the payments would be made. The judge held that it would be going too far if the Court were to imply terms such as a reasonable length of time for the Defendant to pay.

Reflecting on the judgment, Khaled Moyeed said, “This is an enormous relief for my client, who has been dealing with the stress of this case for over seven years. Justice has finally been served, and we are grateful for the court’s careful consideration of the facts and the legal principles involved.”

Khaled instructed William Spence of Selbourne Chambers for the re-trial.

The full judgement can be read here.

To learn more about Khaled’s practice, please visit https://gunnercooke.com/people/khaled-moyeed/