Buckles’ Dispute Resolution team successfully represented a client in an international case undertaken in cooperation with the firm’s German partner, Graf Legal, who referred Mrs Hannelore Matt, co-founder of one of Germany’s largest chains of opticians, MATT Optik.
When English woman Ms Liana Fox was in a relationship with Mr Andreas Matt, his mother, Mrs Hannelore Matt says she lent her son’s former fiancée £200k to purchase a property in England, following the couple’s engagement in 2014, which Mrs Matt wanted back when the relationship ultimately failed.
But Fox refused to pay the money back. She claimed that it had been used to cover debts owed to her by her fiancé for various extravagant purchases and was not intended for the purchase of a house in England which she would share with Mr Matt once they were married and with Mrs Matt some of the time, as claimed by Mrs Matt.
Nicole Hirst, a solicitor in the Dispute Resolution team at Buckles, commented: “Any legal matter with an international aspect is going to be more complex and it was gratifying that our German partner firm Graf Legal were confident in our abilities to pursue the matter in the English Courts.
“As is often the case where families, money and loans are concerned, the case contains many ‘he said, she said’ references, but the facts of the case are hard to refute, which is clearly why HHJ Mark Raeside KC, found in favour of our client, Mrs Matt.
“It helps enormously in such cases when the law firm appointed in the UK not only has dual-qualified lawyers, but many fluent in a range of languages, including French, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese and of course German.
“To succeed in such cases, it is critical to understand fully the information being conveyed by a client, not just in written documents, but when details are offered verbally, with precision and passion – it makes a big difference to how we work and the confidence we can instil in our clients.
“This was a great team effort and my thanks go to barrister Jeff Hardman from New Square Chambers and to the Dispute Resolution Team, who made possible this success in the Central London County Court.”
Although Ms Fox provided a list of what she believed she was owed, it was compiled after the relationship ended and not when Mrs Matt loaned the £200k for the purchase of a property as she asserted throughout.
The Judge was satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, that the money paid by Mrs Matt was indeed for the purchase of a property and not cover any alleged debts of her son, Andreas Matt. The Judge was also satisfied that Mrs Fox knew this, but had convinced herself that her version of events was the truth.
In deciding Mrs Matt lending the money was the most plausible explanation, rather than the implausible alternative promoted by Mrs Fox, the Judge ordered the loan be repaid, with interest. Mrs Fox will also be responsible for the legal costs for the trial, which are yet to be quantified.
