The case centered on whether a letter dated 18 March 1986 from Pridie Brewster and countersigned by Harris constituted a legally binding agreement in respect of the future merger of the practices. The judge held that it did.
He said that in the years following the letter the two firms were never formally merged but Harris worked on a part-time consultancy basis for Pridie Brewster and in turn Pridie Brewster carried out work for Mr Harris’s clients and paid him fees under the terms of the agreement.
However, in late 1998 Harris began negotiations for the transfer of his business to another firm, Harris Krafton.
He claimed that the March 1986 letter was a gentleman’s agreement.
However, finding that Pridie Brewster was entitled to damages, to be decided at a future date, Deputy High Court Judge David Vaughan QC said today that he had no doubt that the March 1986 letter constituted a legally binding agreement.
The second largest improvement in ‘significant’ levels of financial distress since the EU Referendum was in professional services, found research from Begbies Traynor
Just one half of UK practices have implemented a pricing structure around auto enrolment implementation and advice - with many suffering increased costs
Deloitte's north-west Europe foray; BDO, Smith & Williamson investment paths; Shelley Stock Hutter; and Wilkins Kennedy discussed by editor Kevin Reed on our Friday Afternoon Live broadcast
Accountants should alter their perspective on auto-enrolment to maximise business opportunities, according to Eric Clapton.