Conway & Anor v Eze

Conway & Anor v Eze

The relationship between Mr Obahor and Prince Eze was not such as to engage the law on bribes or secret commissions. Mr Obahor was not acting as a fiduciary agent for Prince Eze at the time the claimants agreed to pay him a fee. The contract was valid and enforceable, and the defendant was in breach. The claimants are entitled to damages for breach of contract, including the difference between the contract price and the resale price, and reasonable consequential losses.

Parties
Claimant: Richard Conway; Claimant: Deborah Conway; Defendant: Prince Arthur Ikpechukwu Eze
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 January 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim allowed in part; contract valid and enforceable; damages awarded for breach of contract, not to the full extent claimed.
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Secret Commission, Bribery, Damages, Rescission, Fiduciary Duty
Contract Law Agency Law Breach of Contract Secret Commission Bribery Damages Rescission Fiduciary Duty

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Richard Conway

Claimant

Deborah Conway

Claimant

Prince Arthur Ikpechukwu Eze

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the contract for sale was void or voidable due to a secret commission/bribe paid to the defendant's agent
  2. 2 Whether the agent's relationship with the defendant engaged the law on bribes/secret commissions
  3. 3 Whether the claimants are entitled to damages for breach of contract and the quantum thereof

Ratio Decidendi

The relationship between Mr Obahor and Prince Eze was not such as to engage the law on bribes or secret commissions. Mr Obahor was not acting as a fiduciary agent for Prince Eze at the time the claimants agreed to pay him a fee. The contract was valid and enforceable, and the defendant was in breach. The claimants are entitled to damages for breach of contract, including the difference between the contract price and the resale price, and reasonable consequential losses.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed in part; contract valid and enforceable; damages awarded for breach of contract, not to the full extent claimed.

Orders

  • Defendant found in breach of contract.
  • Claimants entitled to damages for breach of contract, including the difference between the contract price and the resale price, and reasonable consequential losses.