Restitution
front page

What's new?

Archive front page

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2007

2006

2008

2009

In Daraydan Holdings Ltd v Solland International Ltd Lawrence Collins J follows A-G for Hong Kong v Reid, and distinguishes Lister v Stubbs on the basis that in Lister the source of the bribe money was a third party whereas in Daraydan it was the principal itself - thus in the judge's view there was a 'proprietary base' to the principal's claim. There seems to have been some leapfrogging going on here as the principal appears to have paid the money to the briber as the (improperly inflated) contractual price for some interior design work; the briber then paid it on to the agent as a 'kickback'. Halifax v Thomas is waved to one side, I am pleased to say. Available on-line at:

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2004/622.html

Charles

Dr Charles Mitchell
Reader in Law
Director of Postgraduate Taught Programmes
School of Law
King's College London
Strand
London WC2R 2LS

tel: 020 7848 2290
fax: 020 7848 2465