The claimant sought leave to appeal against rejection of his claim against the defendants. He had deposited a stone with them for evaluation aa a possible rough diamond pf considerable value. He said that the one returned to him was not the same one, but a fake. Photographs had beeen taken before and as it was handed over. The defendants had produced expert reports to say that the returned stone matched the one received.
Held: Though the court at first instance had indeed seen difficulties in the defence, the judge had been persuaded by what was strong expert evidence. The court’s task now was to see whether the judge had made any error of law, None had been identified, and the evidence was enough to support the judge’s conclusion. Leave was refused.
Elias LJ
[2016] EWCA Civ 272
Bailii
England and Wales
Contract
Updated: 12 January 2022; Ref: scu.561598