Shell International Trading & Shipping Company Ltd & Ors v Tikhonov & Ors [2010] EWHC 1399 (QB) (23 June 2010)

Shell International Trading & Shipping Company Ltd & Ors v Tikhonov & Ors [2010] EWHC 1399 (QB) (23 June 2010)

Mr Tikhonov received secret commissions and bribes in breach of his fiduciary duties as an employee, using offshore companies for his benefit. Shell is entitled to recover the sums as bribes and, in respect of the 2006 payments, to trace them into the Riga flat. Mr Tikhonov's explanations were found to be dishonest...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2010] EWHC 1399 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Shell International Trading & Shipping Company Limited; Claimant: Shell Trading International Limited; Claimant: Shell Trading Russia BV; Defendant: Evgeny Tikhonov; Defendant: T Capital Limited; Defendant: T Capital Management Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 June 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil / High Court Trial Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the claimants; counterclaim dismissed.
Legal Topics
Bribery and Secret Commissions, Constructive Trusts, Employee Fiduciary Duties, Tracing of Assets, Wrongful Dismissal
Employment Law Commercial Law Equity and Trusts Bribery and Secret Commissions Constructive Trusts Employee Fiduciary Duties Tracing of Assets Wrongful Dismissal

Source-derived case record

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shell International Trading & Shipping Company Limited

Claimant

Shell Trading International Limited

Claimant

Shell Trading Russia BV

Claimant

Evgeny Tikhonov

Defendant

T Capital Limited

Defendant

T Capital Management Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / High Court Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr Tikhonov received secret commissions or bribes in breach of his duties as an employee
  2. 2 Whether the sums paid to Mr Tikhonov via offshore companies were for his benefit and constituted bribes
  3. 3 Whether Shell is entitled to recover the sums as bribes or trace them into property acquired by Mr Tikhonov

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Tikhonov received secret commissions and bribes in breach of his fiduciary duties as an employee, using offshore companies for his benefit. Shell is entitled to recover the sums as bribes and, in respect of the 2006 payments, to trace them into the Riga flat. Mr Tikhonov's explanations were found to be dishonest and his counterclaim for wrongful dismissal fails.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the claimants; counterclaim dismissed.

Orders

  • Mr Tikhonov to pay STASCO $2,461,723 as bribes received via TCL for his benefit.
  • Mr Tikhonov to account to STRU for £284,843 and $252,856 received as bribes in 2006, with tracing into the Riga flat to the extent of 72.4% of its value.