Crown Prosecution Service (Appellant) v Aquila Advisory Ltd (Respondent)
UKSC 2019/0105
Two directors of a company used the company to commit a criminal offence, from which they personally obtained a benefit of £4.55 million. They were prosecuted and convicted of the criminal offence and were made the subject of confiscation orders based on that benefit. However, in an action between Aquila Advisory Ltd (to which the company’s rights had been assigned) and the directors, in which the Crown Prosecution Service intervened, the High Court determined that the company, and hence Aquila Advisory Ltd, could recover what remained of the £4.55m from the directors because they had acted in breach of their fiduciary duty to the company and thus held the proceeds of the crime on constructive trust for the company. The CPS seeks to prevent Aquila from recovering the £4.55m in priority to the confiscation orders.
The issue is:
Where a proprietary claim is brought by a company against its directors to recover proceeds of crime received in breach of fiduciary duty: (1) Can that proprietary claim be asserted in priority to a confiscation order obtained by the Crown Prosecution Service? (2) Can the illegality of the directors be attributed to the company in circumstances where the company suffered no loss and stood to profit from the crime?
The Supreme Court dismisses the Appeal. Lord Stephens gives the judgment, with which all members of the Court agree.
More information is available on our website.
Видео Crown Prosecution Service (Appellant) v Aquila Advisory Ltd (Respondent) канала UKSupremeCourt
Two directors of a company used the company to commit a criminal offence, from which they personally obtained a benefit of £4.55 million. They were prosecuted and convicted of the criminal offence and were made the subject of confiscation orders based on that benefit. However, in an action between Aquila Advisory Ltd (to which the company’s rights had been assigned) and the directors, in which the Crown Prosecution Service intervened, the High Court determined that the company, and hence Aquila Advisory Ltd, could recover what remained of the £4.55m from the directors because they had acted in breach of their fiduciary duty to the company and thus held the proceeds of the crime on constructive trust for the company. The CPS seeks to prevent Aquila from recovering the £4.55m in priority to the confiscation orders.
The issue is:
Where a proprietary claim is brought by a company against its directors to recover proceeds of crime received in breach of fiduciary duty: (1) Can that proprietary claim be asserted in priority to a confiscation order obtained by the Crown Prosecution Service? (2) Can the illegality of the directors be attributed to the company in circumstances where the company suffered no loss and stood to profit from the crime?
The Supreme Court dismisses the Appeal. Lord Stephens gives the judgment, with which all members of the Court agree.
More information is available on our website.
Видео Crown Prosecution Service (Appellant) v Aquila Advisory Ltd (Respondent) канала UKSupremeCourt
Показать
Комментарии отсутствуют
Информация о видео
Другие видео канала
R (on the app. of Wright) v Resilient Energy Severndale Ltd and Forest of Dean District CouncilR (on the application of ZH and CN) v London Borough of Newham and London Borough of LewishamCommissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs v Frank A Smart & Son Ltd (Scotland)In the matter of NY (A Child)Hastings Borough Council (Appellant) v Manolete Partners Plc (Respondent)UK Supreme Court Judgments 24th October 2012 - Part 3In the matter of an application by Deborah McGuinness for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland)Swearing-in of Lord Lloyd-Jones as a Justice of the Supreme Court of the United KingdomJSC BTA Bank (Respondent) v Khrapunov (Appellant)CR3 16 06 20 YT 1 Pringle MPEG4 VODUK Supreme Court Judgments 6th February 2013 - Part 1R v HarveyR (on applications of Haney, Kaiyam, Massey and Robinson) v The Secretary of State for JusticeR (on the application of Mott) (Respondent) v Environment Agency (Appellant)Commissioners for HMRC v Joint Administrators of Lehman Brothers InternationalIn the matter of B (A child)R (on the app. of Tigere) v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and SkillsUK Supreme Court Judgments 24th July 2013 - Part 1Barnardo's (Appellant) v Buckinghamshire and others (Respondents)UK Supreme Court Judgments 17th April 2013 - Part 2Gordon and others v Campbell Riddell Breeze Paterson LLP