A lawsuit against two charities by a fashion business owner over a cancelled fundraising event has been almost entirely struck out.
Amanda Navaian, founder of handbag brand Marici London, claimed that her business collapsed after the King Charles III Charitable Fund (KCCF) and food charity FareShare withdrew from a 2024 event.
Her claim was against the charities and Dori Dana-Haeri, chair of the Coronation Food Project, an initiative led by KCCF.
On Thursday, a High Court judge ruled that there was “no realistic prospect of success” for most of Navaian’s £6m damages claim, which he described as “not legally coherent”.
However, FareShare has now offered to pay £25,000 to cover Navaian’s expenses in relation to the cancelled event.
‘Fundamentally flawed’ claim
In 2024, Navaian volunteered to organise a third-party fundraiser with proceeds going to FareShare as part of the KCCF’s Coronation Food Project.
The dinner was cancelled on 14 June that year, a day before it was due to take place, Navaian claimed, as was a t-shirt line for a FareShare food waste project.
A spokesperson for FareShare and the food project previously told Civil Society: “This fundraiser never took place due to a breakdown in the relationship between Ms Navaian, FareShare and the proposed venue.”
However, Navaian launched legal proceedings with a claim for £6m in damages as she argued that the cancellation had resulted in her being unable to work and caused financial loss.
In his ruling, judge Gavin Mansfield stated the grounds for her primary claims were “fundamentally flawed”.
In particular, Mansfield found “no arguable case” that an oral agreement between Navaian and the charities was “a binding contract”.
He said: “There can therefore be no claim that the claimants were induced to enter into such a contract, and no loss can flow from any such misrepresentation.”
Navaian alleged that an oral agreement was made in a 29 April 2024 Zoom meeting where KCCF allegedly gave approval for the dinner and t-shirt project.
But Mansfield said: “It is sufficient to say that the pleaded case […] makes no mention of any representative of FareShare attending, saying anything, or agreeing anything.”
The other two main claims – of unlawful interference with economic relations and misrepresentation – were also dismissed by the judge.
Mansfield found “no proper basis” for Navaian’s assertion that the charities told restaurant CLAP London to cancel the dinner.
On the latter, the judge stated that the misrepresentation claim, that Navaian was “induced” into a contract with the charities, was “hard to follow”.
Mansfield thus concluded that there were no actionable grounds for misrepresentation.
Charity to pay £25,000
Despite dismissing most of Navaian’s claims, an agreement that FareShare would reimburse expenses incurred by Navaian of up to £25,000 was accepted by the defendants.
This came after the judge criticised FareShare’s reasoning for not paying the expenses after Navaian submitted an invoice.
Mansfield stated: “The defendants’ reason for not paying expenses under the reimbursement agreement is that an itemised invoice has not been submitted.
“I am unimpressed by that argument.”
The judge encouraged all parties to resolve the £25,000 expenses agreement out of court and noted that the charities have made an “open offer” to pay that sum.
A KCCF spokesperson said: “We welcome the judge’s decision to give summary judgment in favour of KCCF and Ms Dana-Haeri, dismissing all the claims against them.”
A FareShare spokesperson added: "FareShare has repeatedly offered Ms Navaian the chance to claim up to £25,000 to cover any expenses she may have incurred as part of the proposed project.
"We therefore understand the judge's ruling against dismissing that part of the claim and hope we can come to an agreement with Ms Navaian and finally close the matter."
Civil Society has approached Navaian for comment.
