Judicial principles and studies
Dispute / Sole Proprietorship: Diminution in Value vs. Quantum Meruit
A brief educational summary on the court's stance regarding the sole proprietorship’s unity with its owner and the limits on combining diminution-in-value awards with quantum meruit.
Updated: 10 September 2026
Prepared and reviewed by: Ashraf Al-Khawaja
Subject
The General Panel examined the matter to harmonize jurisprudence concerning awards for diminution in value versus claims for quantum meruit, premised on the position that both remedies do not coexist.
Summary
Established case-law treats a sole proprietorship and its owner as one legal person, with the trade name lacking an independent legal personality; the proprietorship’s liabilities are not separate from the owner’s. A quantum meruit claim falls within the scope of diminution in value as one of its components, and therefore both remedies may not be awarded for the same area or act because that would duplicate compensation for the same event.
Practical significance
In practice, claims and rulings should avoid granting both diminution-in-value awards and quantum meruit for the same subject-matter, taking into account that a sole proprietorship and its trade name are legally unified with the owner. This is a general educational summary and does not constitute a judicial text or legal advice.
Sources and references
Verify the official text and latest amendments before relying on this material professionally.