Alta Trading UK Ltd (formerly known as Arcadia Petroleum Ltd) v Peter Miles Bosworth

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
CourtKing's Bench Division (Commercial Court)
JudgeMr Justice Henshaw
Judgment Date22 January 2025
Neutral Citation[2025] EWHC 91 (Comm)
Docket NumberCase No: CL-2015-000047

-name"> (10) The Cornhill Group Limited

Defendants
Before:

THE HONOURABLE Mr Justice Henshaw

Case No: CL-2015-000047

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE

BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS OF ENGLAND AND WALES

KING'S BENCH DIVISION

COMMERCIAL COURT

Royal Courts of Justice

Rolls Building, Fetter Lane,

London, EC4A 1NL

Alec Haydon KC, David Heaton, Emily Albou, Ali Al-Karim, Danielle Carrington and Amber Turner (instructed by Grosvenor Law LLP) for the Claimants

Richard Eschwege KC (instructed by Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan UK LLP) for the First and Second Defendants

Tom Sprange KC and Freddie Popplewell (instructed by King & Spalding International LLP) for the Fifth and Ninth Defendants

The Seventh and Eighth Defendants did not appear and were not represented

Hearing dates: 7–10, 13–17 and 20–23 May, 4–5, 10–11, 17–21 and 24–28 June, 1–5, 22–23, 25–26 and 28 July 2024

Draft judgment circulated to parties: 16 December 2024

Approved Judgment

Mr Justice Henshaw

(A) INTRODUCTION

6

(B) OVERVIEW OF PARTIES AND CLAIMS

7

(C) WITNESSES OF FACT

10

(D) EXPERT EVIDENCE

16

(E) DOCUMENTS

17

(F) WEST AFRICAN OIL TRADING

20

(1) Risks, use of contract holders and sleeving

20

(2) Obtaining term contracts, sponsors and service providers

24

(3) Service providers' ongoing role

27

(4) Remuneration of intermediaries and service providers

29

(5) Special purpose companies

35

(G) PRE-2005 ACTIVITIES OF ARCADIA, ATTOCK AND MR KELBRICK

35

(1) Origins and development of the Arcadia Group and Attock Mauritius

35

(2) Physical and paper trading

37

(3) Service providers

43

(4) Pang Ling

47

(5) Tristar, Mr Decker and Arcadia Mauritius

48

(6) The Sao Tome Contract

50

(7) Mr Kelbrick leaves Arcadia

52

(H) FARAHEAD'S ACQUISITION OF ARCADIA AND SURROUNDING EVENTS

58

(1) Principal Search briefing paper

58

(2) Frontline's objectives

63

(3) Frontline comparison document and April 2005 meeting

64

(4) Service providers, risks and Beirut office proposal

65

(5) Alleged Bosworth continuing control of Arcadia Mauritius

72

(6) Sleeving arrangements

76

(7) Summer 2005 discussions of bonuses

78

(8) Linklaters due diligence and Pang Ling

79

(9) Discussions and events in autumn 2005

80

(10) Business with Attock Mauritius

86

(11) The Zafiro Contract and Sonergy

87

(12) Completion of Farahead's purchase of Arcadia

99

(13) Memorandum of Understanding with Concerto

99

(I) SUBSEQUENT EVENTS

100

(1) Establishment of Arcadia Lebanon

100

(a) The parties' cases

100

(b) Witness statements

102

(c) Documents

113

(d) Defendants' oral evidence

118

(e) Claimants' oral evidence

123

(f) Conclusions

134

(2) Arcadia Lebanon becomes operational

135

(3) Mr Kelbrick's role as service provider to Arcadia

136

(4) Audit enquiries

143

(5) Examples of transaction chains involving Arcadia Lebanon

145

(a) Pricing under the Term Contracts

145

(b) EY Deal 6

148

(c) EY Deal 19

150

(6) Senegal Contract

151

(7) Arcadia Lebanon payments to GEPVTN

158

(8) Autumn 2007

163

(9) Arcadia's products business: MRS and the African Horizon

165

(10) Events in 2008

168

(a) Review of Farahead governance

168

(b) Indarama project and Concerto

170

(c) Alleged statement about closure of Arcadia Mauritius

171

(d) Proposed restructuring

173

(e) Discussions about ownership of Arcadia Lebanon

175

(f) Other events of mid 2008

182

(g) Discussion of Arcadia Lebanon dividend

183

(h) Alleged deceitful misrepresentation that Arcadia Lebanon dormant

185

(i) Further discussion of Arcadia Lebanon dividend

189

(11) Events in 2009

192

(a) The Attock/GEPetrol Contract

192

(b) Arcadia Lebanon profits and dividend

193

(c) Withdrawal from Concerto joint venture

197

(d) Projector payments

199

(e) Further events/discussions concerning Arcadia Lebanon

199

(f) Alleged cessation misrepresentation

203

(g) The Arcadia Mauritius/NNPC Contract

207

(h) Mr Kelbrick's acquisition of Attock Mauritius, Arcadia Mauritius and Attock Lebanon

210

(i) Continued West African Updates

214

(12) Events in 2010

215

(a) Arcadia bonus scheme

215

(b) The Crudex/NNPC Contract

215

(c) The Attock Mauritius/NNPC Contract

220

(d) The Cathay/NNPC Contract

221

(e) Other events in 2010

225

(13) Events of 2011

230

(a) The Azenith Nigeria/NNPC Contract

230

(b) Further compliance training

235

(c) Business plan

235

(d) Planned engagement of EY

237

(e) Bosworth retention bonus payment

237

(f) Equinox

238

(g) Atlantic Nigeria

241

(h) Capital Oil & Gas

255

(14) Events in 2012

262

(a) Summary of investment status

262

(b) Cakasa

262

(c) The Arcadia website in 2012

265

(15) Events of 2013

265

(a) Attock Dubai

265

(b) Mr Bosworth's resignation

266

(c) Arcadia restructuring plan and investigations

266

(d) Enquiries into Arcadia Lebanon dividend

267

(e) Creation of the Hannas Note

270

(f) August and September 2013; departure of Mr Hurley

272

(g) 2013 Attock Dubai transaction

275

(h) Pass-through payments

281

(16) 2014 and 2015

282

(J) THE CLAIMANTS' CLAIMS

282

(1) The pleaded case

282

(2) The diversion case in overview

299

(3) The case in relation to the Arcadia Lebanon transactions

300

(4) The case in relation to the Attock Transactions

309

(5) The dishonesty case

316

(a) Roles and collusion

316

(b) Dishonesty alleged against Mr Bosworth

317

(c) Dishonesty alleged against Mr Hurley

319

(d) Dishonesty alleged against Mr Kelbrick

320

(K) APPLICABLE PRINCIPLES

322

(1) Causes of action

322

(2) English law

323

(a) Dishonesty

323

(b) Unlawful means conspiracy

325

(c) Breach of fiduciary duty

326

(d) Dishonest Assistance

341

(e) Knowing Receipt

342

(3) Swiss law

343

(a) Article 717 SCO

344

(b) Article 754 SCO

349

(c) Article 423 SCO

349

(d) Article 41 SCO and Article 158 SPC

350

(e) Article 43 SCO

351

(f) Accessory liability

351

(L) EVALUATION OF THE CLAIMANTS' CLAIMS

352

(1) General matters

352

(2) The Arcadia Lebanon Transactions

354

(3) The Attock Transactions

370

(4) Dishonesty

376

(a) Roles and collusion

376

(b) Dishonesty alleged against Mr Bosworth

380

(c) Dishonesty alleged against Mr Hurley

382

(d) Dishonesty alleged against Mr Kelbrick

383

(e) Conclusion as to alleged dishonesty

384

(5) Conclusion on the Claimant's essential case

384

(M) THE COUNTERCLAIMS

386

(1) Bosworth investment in Cushing storage project

386

(2) Bosworth retention bonus

393

(3) Bosworth unpaid annual bonuses

402

(4) Hurley unpaid bonus

404

(5) Set-off against Mr Bosworth entitlements

409

(6) Interest

410

(N) CONCLUSIONS

410

ANNEX – THE APPLICATION TO AMEND

411

(A) INTRODUCTION

1

This case relates to a course of events which the Claimants, members of the Arcadia Group, allege amounted to “a substantial and sustained fraud”. The events involved 144 crude oil purchase and sale transactions between April 2007 and May 2013 relating to oil originating in West Africa.

2

In simple terms, the Claimants allege that fraudulent transactions were carried out in this way. In the course of trading transactions in which an entity within the (legitimate) Arcadia Group was buying and/or selling crude oil, fraudulent entities which were not part of the Arcadia Group, but rather were beneficially owned and/or controlled by some or all of the individual Defendants, were ‘inserted’ into the chain of transactions between the legitimate Arcadia Group entity and its buyer and/or seller. The

‘inserted’ entities extracted profit that would otherwise have accrued to the legitimate Arcadia Group. On other occasions, trading transactions into which an entity within the legitimate Arcadia Group would or could have entered were diverted to fraudulent entities which were not part of the Arcadia Group, but rather were beneficially owned by and/or controlled by some or all of the individual Defendants. In addition, entities within the legitimate Arcadia Group were caused to enter into loss-making transactions for the sole or dominant purpose of ensuring that profits accrued to and/or losses were avoided by entities beneficially owned by and/or controlled by individual Defendants
3

The Claimants allege that the First and Second Defendants, Mr Bosworth and Mr Hurley, “were centrally involved in the conception and operation of the fraud perpetrated on them and are likely to have been the primary architects of and beneficiaries from the fraud”. The Claimants allege that the Fifth Defendant, Mr Kelbrick, “played an active and essential role in the fraud perpetrated on them”, was closely associated with the relevant trading activities as well as with Mr Bosworth and Mr Hurley, “played an important and active role in the operations of the fraudulent companies” – including the Ninth Defendant Attock Oil International Limited, Mauritius (“ Attock Mauritius”) – and was beneficially interested in “entities who appear to have profited from the fraud”.

4

Mr Bosworth and Mr Hurley counterclaim for certain bonuses and similar sums which they allege remained unpaid when they departed from the Arcadia Group in 2013.

5

The case was tried before me over a period of approximately 10 weeks, during which I heard evidence from, among others, the ultimate owners of the Arcadia Group, the individual Defendants (Messrs Bosworth,...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
2 cases
  • Arcadia (Alta) v Bosworth (amendment)
    • United Kingdom
    • King's Bench Division (Commercial Court)
    • 21 October 2025
    ...2007 and May 2013 relating to oil originating in West Africa ( Alta Trading UK (formerly known as Arcadia Petroleum Limited) v Bosworth [2025] EWHC 91 (Comm) (“ the 22 January judgment”)). In the same judgment I upheld certain counterclaims made by the First Defendant (“ D1”) and the Second......
  • Alta Trading UK Limited & Ors v Peter Miles Bosworth & Ors
    • United Kingdom
    • Queen's Bench Division (Commercial Court)
    • 22 January 2025
    ...arguable as a matter of substance, has been brought after the expiry of the limitation period and cannot be permitted pursuant to CPR[2025] EWHC 91 (Comm) Case No: CL-2015-000047 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS OF ENGLAND AND WALES KING'S BENCH DIVISION COMMERCIAL ......