![[2025] EWHC 2477 (Ch)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_O3rEzCI.png){kind=logo}
Conclusion on the evidence
Conclusion on the evidence
We therefore conclude that none of the rent counterclaimed in this case was paid as a result of a mistake. That is, in itself, fatal to all the counterclaims.
However, we will also consider some of the other arguments addressed to us.
- Heading
- The Hon. Mr Justice Griffiths and His Honour Judge Jarman KC
- ISSUE 1 - DID THE DEFENDANTS PAY RENT BECAUSE OF A MISTAKE OF LAW?
- The undisputed facts
- The evidence
- Evidence on behalf of the claimants and Welsh Government
- The evidence of the defendants
- The evidence of Mrs Mitchell
- The evidence of Ms Helen Jones
- The evidence of Mr William Wadley
- Conclusion on the evidence
- ISSUE 2 - WERE THE CLAIMANTS UNJUSTLY ENRICHED AS A RESULT OF THE DEFENDANTS’ MISTAKE?
- ISSUE 3 - IS A CLAIM FOR UNJUST ENRICHMENT NOT AVAILABLE TO THE DEFENDANTS IN ANY EVENT, GIVEN THAT THERE IS A SUBSISTING CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THEM AND THE CLAIMANT LANDLORDS?
- ISSUES 4, 5 AND 6
- Conclusions