Central Bank of Ecuador and others v Conticorp SA and others

Central Bank of Ecuador and others v Conticorp SA and others

The respondents, jointly and severally, dishonestly procured and assisted breaches of fiduciary duty by IAMF’s director in entering into three transactions, which were not in IAMF’s interests and could not honestly have been believed to be so. The assets surrendered by IAMF were valuable, and the GDRs/shares received were not of commensurate value. The courts below erred in law and failed to address central issues. IAMF is entitled to recover the face value of the assets surrendered.

Parties
Appellants: Central Bank of Ecuador and others; Respondents: Conticorp SA and others
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 March 2015
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment of the Privy Council
Outcome
Appeal allowed; respondents found liable for dishonest assistance.
Legal Topics
Dishonest Assistance, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Deceit, Conspiracy, Piercing the Corporate Veil
Company Law Equity Trusts Tort Dishonest Assistance Breach of Fiduciary Duty Deceit Conspiracy +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Central Bank of Ecuador and others

Appellants

Conticorp SA and others

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment of the Privy Council

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether respondents dishonestly assisted breaches of fiduciary duty by IAMF's director in three transactions
  2. 2 Whether the transactions were in IAMF's interests or only Conticorp's
  3. 3 Whether the GDRs and GFC shares delivered were of commensurate value to assets surrendered by IAMF

Ratio Decidendi

The respondents, jointly and severally, dishonestly procured and assisted breaches of fiduciary duty by IAMF’s director in entering into three transactions, which were not in IAMF’s interests and could not honestly have been believed to be so. The assets surrendered by IAMF were valuable, and the GDRs/shares received were not of commensurate value. The courts below erred in law and failed to address central issues. IAMF is entitled to recover the face value of the assets surrendered.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; respondents found liable for dishonest assistance.

Orders

  • Respondents are jointly and severally liable to IAMF for dishonestly procuring and assisting breaches of fiduciary duty in three transactions.
  • IAMF is entitled to recover from respondents the face value of cash, loans (with accrued interest), and shares surrendered, computed as USD 191,953,517.50, subject to correction.