Trafalgar Multi Asset Trading Company Ltd v Hadley & Ors [2022] EWCA Civ 1639 (16 December 2022)

Trafalgar Multi Asset Trading Company Ltd v Hadley & Ors [2022] EWCA Civ 1639 (16 December 2022)

The Respondents' timing and knowledge defences were fanciful and had no real prospect of success. There was no evidence that Trafalgar was informed of the commission arrangements or that full disclosure was made to enable informed consent. The payments to Mr Hadley were secret commissions tainting the transactions, and summary judgment should be granted in Trafalgar's favour on the bribery claim.

Citation
[2022] EWCA Civ 1639
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Trafalgar Multi Asset Trading Company Limited (in Liquidation); Defendant/respondent: James David Hadley; Defendant/respondent: CGrowth Capital Bond Limited; Defendant/respondent: Platinum Pyramid Limited; Defendant/respondent: Bentley Jarrard Thwaite
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 December 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (business and Property Courts, Chancery Division) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Bribery, Fiduciary Duties, Summary Judgment, Informed Consent, Conflict of Interest
Commercial Law Equity and Trusts Company Law Bribery Fiduciary Duties Summary Judgment Informed Consent Conflict of Interest

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Trafalgar Multi Asset Trading Company Limited (in Liquidation)

Claimant/appellant

James David Hadley

Defendant/respondent

CGrowth Capital Bond Limited

Defendant/respondent

Platinum Pyramid Limited

Defendant/respondent

Bentley Jarrard Thwaite

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (business and Property Courts, Chancery Division) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether summary judgment or strike out should be granted on Trafalgar's bribery claim against the Respondents
  2. 2 Whether the Respondents' 'timing' and 'knowledge' defences have a realistic prospect of success
  3. 3 Whether full disclosure was made to Trafalgar sufficient to establish informed consent to the alleged conflicts of interest and payments

Ratio Decidendi

The Respondents' timing and knowledge defences were fanciful and had no real prospect of success. There was no evidence that Trafalgar was informed of the commission arrangements or that full disclosure was made to enable informed consent. The payments to Mr Hadley were secret commissions tainting the transactions, and summary judgment should be granted in Trafalgar's favour on the bribery claim.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Summary judgment granted in favour of Trafalgar on the bribery claim against the Respondents
  • The timing and knowledge defences are struck out