Nature Resorts Ltd (Appellant/Cross-respondent) v First Citizens Bank Ltd (Respondent/Cross-appellant) (Trinidad & Tobago)

Nature Resorts Ltd (Appellant/Cross-respondent) v First Citizens Bank Ltd (Respondent/Cross-appellant) (Trinidad & Tobago)

The Privy Council (majority) held that the presumption of undue influence, if established, was rebutted on the facts: Mr Dankou was an experienced businessman who understood the transaction and its risks, and there was no evidence he acted under undue influence. The mortgage was readily explicable and beneficial to Mr Dankou as sole shareholder. On the issue of unlawful financial assistance, the Board declined to decide the point, finding insufficient factual and legal material and procedural unfairness in raising it for the first time on final appeal. The appeal was dismissed.

Citation
[2022] UKPC 10
Parties
Appellant/cross Respondent: Nature Resorts Ltd; Respondent/cross Appellant: First Citizens Bank Ltd
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
04 April 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment (privy Council)
Outcome
appeal dismissed (majority); dissent would have allowed appeal
Legal Topics
Undue Influence, Financial Assistance by Company, Mortgage Enforceability, Statutory Interpretation, Illegality in Contract
Contract Law Company Law Banking Law Equity Undue Influence Financial Assistance by Company Mortgage Enforceability Statutory Interpretation +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 12
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nature Resorts Ltd

Appellant/cross Respondent

First Citizens Bank Ltd

Respondent/cross Appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment (privy Council)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the deed of mortgage was voidable for undue influence exercised over Mr Dankou/NRL by Mr Wheeler
  2. 2 Whether the mortgage contravened sections 56-57 of the Trinidad and Tobago Companies Act (unlawful financial assistance)
  3. 3 Whether the Bank could enforce the mortgage if it was unlawful financial assistance

Ratio Decidendi

The Privy Council (majority) held that the presumption of undue influence, if established, was rebutted on the facts: Mr Dankou was an experienced businessman who understood the transaction and its risks, and there was no evidence he acted under undue influence. The mortgage was readily explicable and beneficial to Mr Dankou as sole shareholder. On the issue of unlawful financial assistance, the Board declined to decide the point, finding insufficient factual and legal material and procedural unfairness in raising it for the first time on final appeal. The appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed (majority); dissent would have allowed appeal

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.