header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
16 October 2014 / Rory Cochrane
Issue: 7626 / Categories: Features , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Conflict resolved?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
cochrane

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.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: ‘Joe Donor’ ruling exposes dangers of unregulated conception
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
NLJ this week: CILEX warns Mazur ruling must spark reform
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Conditional job offers carry hidden risks for employers
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
NLJ this week: Diamond rings and broken promises

An engagement ring may symbolise romance, but the courts remain decidedly practical about who keeps it after a split, writes Mark Pawlowski, barrister and professor emeritus of property law at the University of Greenwich, in this week's NLJ

NLJ this week: The battle over medical report fees intensifies
Medical reporting organisation fees have become ‘the final battleground’ in modern costs litigation, says Kris Kilsby, costs lawyer at Peak Costs and council member of the Association of Costs Lawyers, in this week's NLJ
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll