Belmont Finance Corporation Ltd -v- Williams Furniture Ltd; CA 1979

References: [1979] Ch 250, [1978] 3 WLR 712, [1979] 1 All ER 118
Coram: Buckley LJ
The company directors had made cash available to the company’s buyer.
Held: Fraud is not easily to be attributed to an employer. An employee’s knowledge is not to be treated as the employer’s knowledge: ‘indeed it is a well recognized exception from the general rule that a principal is affected by notice received by his agent that, if the agent is acting in fraud of his principal and the matter of which he has notice is relevant to the fraud, that knowledge is not to be imputed to the principal. So in my opinion the plaintiff company should not be regarded as party to the conspiracy on the ground of lack of necessary guilty knowledge.’
This case cites:

  • See also – Belmont Finance Corporation Ltd -v- Williams Furniture Ltd (No 2) ([1980] 1 All ER 393)
    It had been alleged that there had been a conspiracy involving the company giving unlawful financial assistance for the purchase of its own shares.
    Held: Dishonesty is not a necessary ingredient of liability in an allegation of a ‘knowing . .

This case is cited by:

  • See also – Belmont Finance Corporation Ltd -v- Williams Furniture Ltd (No 2) ([1980] 1 All ER 393)
    It had been alleged that there had been a conspiracy involving the company giving unlawful financial assistance for the purchase of its own shares.
    Held: Dishonesty is not a necessary ingredient of liability in an allegation of a ‘knowing . .
  • Applied – Attorney-General’s Reference (No. 2 of 1982) CACD ([1984] QB 624, [1984] 2 WLR 447)
    The court considered the actions of company directors in dishonestly appropriating the property of the company, and whether since the title to the goods was transferred, the goods had remained the property of the company.
    Held: The actions of . .
  • Cited – Prest -v- Petrodel Resources Ltd and Others SC (Bailii, [2013] UKSC 34, [2013] WLR(D) 237, [2013] 3 FCR 210, [2013] 4 All ER 673, [2013] Fam Law 953, [2013] 2 FLR 732, [2013] BCC 571, [2013] 2 AC 415, [2013] WTLR 1249, [2013] 3 WLR 1, Bailii Summary, UKSC 2013/0004, SC Summary, SC)
    In the course of ancillary relief proceedings in a divorce questions arose regarding company assets owned by the husband. The court was asked as to the power of the court to order the transfer of assets owned entirely in the company’s names. The . .

Leave a Reply