In a case concerning the former Prime Minister of Georgia, the Privy Council held that, contrary to the suggestion in recent cases and the findings of the Court of Appeal for Bermuda, there is no requirement that a claimant bringing a claim of fraudulent misrepresentation need to have been aware of the representation in question and understood it to have been made.
As a result, the fact that there was no finding that Mr Ivanishvili had been aware of and understood his fraudulent relationship manager to be making the misrepresentations on which the claim was made did not prevent the Board from holding that they were actionable under Bermudian law.
However, as the fraudulent misrepresentations giving rise to the alleged tort were made in Georgia and the “double actionability rule” applies in Bermuda, the Privy Council dismissed Mr Ivanishvili’s cross-appeal as the misrepresentation claim was brought after the Georgian limitation period had expired.
The Privy Council also unanimously dismissed Credit Suisse Life (Bermuda) Ltd’s appeal on the issues of breach of contract and fiduciary duty, save for the fact that the correct start date for the assessment of damages was the date at which the policy was commenced not when the assets were transferred.
Read the full judgment here.
