Erlanger v New Sombrero Phosphate Co
(1878) 3 Appeal Cases 121818781 min read
The case in brief30-second read
- Facts
- Erlanger purchased an island for 55,000 pounds. He formed a company and sold the island to the company for 110,000 pounds, making 55,000 pounds profit. The board that approved the purchase was not independent (promoter's nominees).
- Issue
- Whether a promoter who sells property to the company at a profit owes a duty of disclosure, and whether non-disclosure to an independent board gives the company the right to rescind.
- Held
- The House of Lords held that promoters stand in a fiduciary relation to the company. They must make full disclosure of all material facts (including personal profit) to an independent board. Disclosure to a board of the promoter's own nominees is no disclosure. The company is entitled to rescind the contract and recover the secret profit.
- Principle
- A promoter stands in fiduciary relation to the company and must disclose all material facts including personal profit to an independent board
Facts
- Erlanger purchased an island for 55,000 pounds.
- He formed a company and sold the island to the company for 110,000 pounds, making 55,000 pounds profit.
- The board that approved the purchase was not independent (promoter's nominees).
- The company later sought rescission.
Issue
- Whether a promoter who sells property to the company at a profit owes a duty of disclosure, and whether non-disclosure to an independent board gives the company the right to rescind.
Held
- The House of Lords held that promoters stand in a fiduciary relation to the company. They must make full disclosure of all material facts (including personal profit) to an independent board. Disclosure to a board of the promoter's own nominees is no disclosure. The company is entitled to rescind the contract and recover the secret profit.
Ratio decidendi
A promoter is in a fiduciary position toward the future company. They must disclose all material facts (especially profit) to genuinely independent directors. Disclosure to a board controlled by the promoter is not valid disclosure. Remedy: the company can rescind the transaction or affirm it and claim the secret profit.
Exam use
How to use it in an answer
Foundation of promoter liability law. Establishes that the fiduciary duty requires disclosure to genuinely independent persons: not merely "telling" promoter-controlled nominees. Still cited in every Indian case on promoter's duty of disclosure.
Cite this
Citation
Erlanger v New Sombrero Phosphate Co (1878) 3 Appeal Cases 1218Reported: (1878) 3 Appeal Cases 1218. This is an educational summary, not the judgment itself. Cite the reported version in professional or academic work.