donated £200,000 to YLJT in October 2004 through the client account of his solicitor David Wineman. Apart from a general assertion in his trial witness statement that he had previously loaned monies to the charities including YLJT the Claimant’s witness statements and disclosure did not deal with this earlier transaction at all. 22. In oral evidence the Claimant asserted that this £200,000 was a loan and had been repaid. No documents were produced to support this assertion, although it appears that bank statements did at one stage exist the Claimant states support his claim that repayments of the loan were made. They were not available to the court. 23. From the Defendant’s side the full ledger of the loan account throughout the relevant period and the underlying bank statements had not been produced at trial. The Defendants had not understood that the nature of this first transfer as a gift was disputed. They were adamant that this was a gift and had not been repaid and invited an adverse inference to be drawn against the Claimant for disputing this without supporting his contentions with documents. In the absence of all the relevant documents from each side, and given the contrasting accounts of the Claimant and First Defendant, it is not possible for the court to reach any definite conclusions on the nature of this first transaction before determining the disputed contentions as to the second one. 24. The Defendants have addressed the matter in much greater detail in their witness statements. The First Defendant states: “The UK Charity was always in need of benefactors to make donations for charitable purposes. I took the opportunity to tell the Claimant what the UK Charity was doing at the time and said that the UK Charity had great need for donations. I asked the Claimant if he would donate money to the UK Charity. He said that he would be prepared to make a sizeable donation. The Claimant; then reverted to me on or around 4 October 2004 and informed me that he would give the UK Charity £200,000. I cannot recall whether he told me this in person or on the telephone. The Claimant did say however that the monies would be coming from an account at his solicitors, David Wineman. He did not say whether the money would be from one of his companies or from his personal funds. Either way, as a fundraiser it made no difference to me whether the money was given in his personal capacity or given from a company. The Claimant or one of his companies gave a donation to the UK Charity of £200,000 by way of a chaps transfer from David Wineman’s client account on 4 October 2004 (see Bank statement at page 20 of ML.3). I am unsure whether the money was from the Claimant or one of his companies as there is no reference on the bank statement other than that it came from David Wineman’s client account”. 25. The circumstances were further explored in cross examination of the First Defendant. On the 4th October the Trusts’ bank would not honour a cheque for £100,000 drawn