From: Enrichment - Restitution & Unjust Enrichment Legal Issues <ENRICHMENT@LISTS.MCGILL.CA>
To: ENRICHMENT@LISTS.MCGILL.CA
Date: 21/11/2012 18:23:21 UTC
Subject: [RDG] backwards tracing in Jersey

Colleagues might be interested in a judgment released last week by the Royal Court of Jersey: Federal Republic of Brazil and the Municipality of Sao Paulo v Durant International Corporation and Kildare Finance Limited, [2012] JRC 211, available in the Brazilian press at 
http://oglobo.globo.com/arquivos/maluf_ilhas_jersey.pdf
and also via
http://www.jerseylaw.je  at http://tinyurl.com/ag8xhgq

In this lengthy judgment, the plaintiffs secured a $10.5 million proprietary award in relation to the proceeds of construction kickbacks. The court declared a constructive trust even though the corrupt profits were received in a civilian jurisdiction. In obiter dicta (para 184), the court preferred AG Hong Kong v Reid to Sinclair Investments v. Versailles. It went on to reject (para 198) the argument that there is a distinction between tracing at common law and tracing in equity. With reference to the writings of Conaglen, Burrows, and others, the court also accepted (paras 217ff) the validity of backwards tracing in concluding that the plaintiffs had established their claim.

Lionel

====

This message was delivered through the Restitution Discussion Group, an international internet LISTSERV devoted to all aspects of the law of unjust enrichment. To subscribe, send "subscribe enrichment" in the body of a message to <listserv@lists.mcgill.ca>. To unsubscribe, send "signoff enrichment" to the same address. To make a posting to all group members, send to <enrichment@lists.mcgill.ca>. The list is run by Lionel Smith of McGill University, <lionel.smith@mcgill.ca>.