Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2002] All ER (D) 239 (Nov)
Neutral Citation: [2002] EWHC 2263 (Comm)
Court: Commercial Court
Judge:

Toulson J

Representation Brian Doctor QC and Richard Slade (instructed by Norton Rose) for the bank.
  Christopher Carr QC, David Owen and Susannah Jones (instructed by Middleton Potts) for the defendant.
Judgment Dates: 15 November 2002

Catchwords

Damages and compensation - Deceit - Measure of damages - Benefits to claimant from defendants' deceitful transaction - Credit to be given to defendants.

The Case

The question whether an alleged benefit should or should not be taken into account could not be determined by mere application of the 'but for' test. Where the wrongful conduct consisted of causing the victim to enter into a venture or transaction which he would not otherwise have entered into, and the wrongdoer alleged that the victim had received a subsequent benefit which he would not have received but for entering into the venture or transaction, the question to be asked was whether the receipt of the benefit was not merely a result of the venture or transaction, in an historical sense, but was part of the complex of obligations and benefits intrinsic, that was, belonging naturally to the venture or transaction.

Practice Areas

If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.