Rory Cochrane provides an update on bribes, agents & principals
The Supreme Court has handed down its judgment in FHR European Ventures LLP and others v Cedar Capital Partners LLC [2014] UKSC 45, [2014] 4 All ER 79. The judgment finally resolves the much debated question (the subject of recent conflicting Court of Appeal authorities, and several forests’ worth of academic discussion) of whether a fiduciary (in this case a purchaser’s agent) holds a bribe or secret commission, received in breach of fiduciary obligation, on trust for the beneficiary.
Anticipation
The judgment has been keenly anticipated by a wide range of practitioners. It is of interest to commercial litigators in general, and of particular interest to fraud and insolvency lawyers. Employment lawyers will also be interested in its application in the context of bribed employees and agents.
In FHR European Ventures, the Supreme Court has stated that a fiduciary (in this case, a property purchaser’s agent) holds a bribe or secret commission received in breach of fiduciary obligation on trust for their beneficiary. In doing so the court has followed the Privy
