Bank of Credit & Commerce International & Anor v Akindele [2000] EWCA Civ 502 (14 June 2000)

Bank of Credit & Commerce International & Anor v Akindele [2000] EWCA Civ 502 (14 June 2000)

The defendant's state of knowledge was not such as to make it unconscionable for him to retain the benefit of the receipt; he had no knowledge of the underlying frauds at the relevant time, and the circumstances did not make it unconscionable for him to enforce the agreement or retain the funds.

Citation
[2000] EWCA Civ 502
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Bank of Credit and Commerce International (Overseas) Ltd; Claimant/appellant: International Credit and Investment Company (Overseas) Ltd; Defendant/respondent: Chief Labode Onadimaki Akindele
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 June 2000
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Knowing Receipt, Knowing Assistance, Constructive Trust, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Dishonesty, Unconscionability
Equity Trusts Company Law Knowing Receipt Knowing Assistance Constructive Trust Breach of Fiduciary Duty Dishonesty +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 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bank of Credit and Commerce International (Overseas) Ltd

Claimant/appellant

International Credit and Investment Company (Overseas) Ltd

Claimant/appellant

Chief Labode Onadimaki Akindele

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the requisite state of knowledge for liability in knowing receipt?
  2. 2 Is dishonesty required for knowing receipt?
  3. 3 Was the defendant's knowledge sufficient to make retention of funds unconscionable?

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant's state of knowledge was not such as to make it unconscionable for him to retain the benefit of the receipt; he had no knowledge of the underlying frauds at the relevant time, and the circumstances did not make it unconscionable for him to enforce the agreement or retain the funds.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Leave to appeal to the House of Lords refused