Crema v Cenkos Securities Plc, [2010] EWHC 461 (Comm), 16/03/2010

The Claimant was an investment banker who worked on a freelance basis. The Defendant was retained to find investors for a company and agreed with the Claimant that he would act as a sub-broker and receive 70% of the brokerage fee due to the Defendant. The Claimant identified a potential investor and introduced him. This potential investor in turn introduced a further investor who did invest in the company. The company was unable to meet the Defendant’s fee because it did not have the assets. The Claimant argued that he was entitled to his 70% portion of the fee irrespective of whether the main broker had actually been paid. Although the Claimant was the effective cause of the introduction of the ultimate investor he was not entitled to his portion of the fee where the main broker had not been paid.

Court: High Court (Commercial Court) (England and Wales)

Full judgement here...