KA-2025-000017 - [2025] EWHC 2311 (KB)

I have considered two prime issues in the appeal. I use the numeration adopted by the Judge and the framing used by the parties before me:

Numerous arguments and sub-arguments, running in diverse directions, were laid before the court. This is a testament to the thoroughness of counsel. However, I emphasise that I shall not deal with all of them as some fall away, some are essentially duplicative, and some to my mind bear little relevance to the cardinal questions I must determine. I thank counsel for their industry.

The test in this appeal is the standard appeal test: whether the Judge’s decision on the law was “wrong” (CPR 52.21). Accordingly, this is not a review of the Judge’s evaluation or discretion. It is a hard-edged question. The court must determine the law itself. The two DBAs are materially the same and stand or fall together. Unless the appellants succeed on both grounds of appeal, the appeal must fail. This is because the DBAs would be fundamentally tainted with illegality by non-compliance with the DBA Rules and thus unenforceable.