In the November 2021 issue of the Cambridge Law Journal, junior barrister at leading chambers Fountain Court, and Associate Lecturer in our department, Aaron Taylor, has published a case note on ‘Civil Claims for Secret Commissions’, on Wood v Commercial First Business Limited; Business Mortgage Finance 4 PLC v Pengelly [2021] EWCA Civ 471

The civil law’s concern with bribery and undisclosed commissions is usually explained as a concern about an agent’s abuse of position for his or her personal advantage, typically to the disadvantage of his or her principal. In these circumstances, the agent is generally described as a fiduciary, and the receipt of a bribe of secret commission as a breach of fiduciary duty. But the requirement that the bribed agent be a fiduciary has often required the court to expand the definition of a fiduciary relationship, giving practical justice at the expense of principle. As the Court of Appeal noted in Wood v Commercial First Business Limited; Business Mortgage Finance 4 PLC v Pengelly [2021] EWCA Civ 471, at [46], it required the term ‘fiduciary duty’ to “be applied so widely as virtually to deprive it of content”. In these conjoined appeals, the court was asked to determine the whether the fiduciary requirement is good law. It held that it is not.

Aaron’s case note explains and welcomes the Court of Appeal’s decision. Here argues that dispensing with the fiduciary requirement reflects the reality that there is a broad spectrum of relationships in which the judgement of one person with influence over another may be swayed by a bribe or commission, and that reality is not best served by the straightjacket of the ‘fiduciary’ label. He goes on to consider to what extent the bribed person must have influence over the principal’s decision-making process. Aaron argues that something more than a minimal “role in the decision-making process” (the phrase used in Novoship v Mikhaylyuk[2012] EWHC 3586 (Comm), at [108] and quoted in Wood; Pengelly) must be required before a person can be held liable for having offered self-interested advice.

On December 10, international human rights day, three students from the Human Rights Law & Clinic module, Cynthia, Bilaal and Jenna, joined our Head of Department, Prof Dimitrios Giannoulopoulos, in a visit to Brighton, Hove and Sussex Sixth Form College (BHASVIC), one of the biggest sixth forms in the country, and took part in the delivery of a human rights workshop to students in the human rights law class there.

The workshop brought to the attention of the sixth form students the government’s recent proposals for the reform of the Human Rights Act. Jenna, Cynthia and Bilaal each presented on the impact of the Human Rights Act, taking the right to a fair trial as an illustration; they had worked on their presentation with their human rights law lecturer Dr Fatima Ahdash. They also facilitated group work and debate during the workshop, and answered student questions about preparing for A levels and life at University.

It was an empowering experience for our students to apply their learning, in a crucial area of Law and Politics, speaking to a young audience, hoping to inspire them, demonstrate to them that the transition from sixth form to University will give them excellent opportunities to be active learners, applying knowledge and skillsets they will have already begun to develop in their sixth form courses.

We were most grateful to BHASVIC for their wonderful hospitality, and for their most generous feedback — the workshop “fitted exactly with where we are in the course and was enormously relevant in the current climate”, commented Adam Robinson, BHASVIC’s A level lead in the course, before adding: “The students very much appreciated it as did I”.

For our Goldsmiths students, it was a unique pleasure and opportunity to visit the College and connect with the sixth form students, Prof Giannoulopoulos wrote back to BHASVIC.

This was our second visit to BHASVIC and we’re already looking forward to visiting wonderful Brighton again.

As part of our AI, Disruptive Technologies and the Law elective module, our students recently had the chance to visit the LUX: New Wave of Contemporary Art exhibition at 180 The Strand in Temple, London.

180 Studios is a key part of London’s creative community, a network of production and exhibition spaces that supports emerging talent and provides a platform for creative growth.

Its LUX Collection brings together 12 of the world’s most celebrated artists (including Es Devlin, Hito Steyerl, Carsten Nicolai and Cao Yuxi) to expand the boundaries of immersive art and blur the lines between the physical and virtual worlds.

The audiovisual exhibition featured AI-generated art, neural networks and other forms of art and cutting-edge technology, all of which are particularly relevant to the innovative LLB curriculum at Goldsmiths Law and its focus on law and technology, art and intellectual property.

The thirteen experiential installations comprising LUX explored the connections between the arts and sciences, the physical and the digital and between humanity and technology — and made our students and academics think of the role that Law can (should?) play in facilitating connections (or safeguarding the boundaries between our humanity and advancements of modern technologies).

The exhibition visit, organised by Dr Plamen Dinev (module leader) and supported by Prof Dimitrios Giannoulopoulos (Head of Department), was followed by coffee and cake at 180 Studios’ café where students had the chance to discuss the event and catch up with each other ahead of a well-deserved Christmas break.