High Court ruling reveals lawyer’s role in £380,000 aviation ‘bribe’

A senior City lawyer arranged for a £380,000 ‘bribe’ to be paid to a former Indian state official in a failed attempt to unlawfully secure a lucrative aviation contract for her clients, a High Court ruling has revealed.

Gauri Advani, partner and head of national firm Eversheds’ India group, who worked at City firm Denton Wilde Sapte (DWS) when the incident took place, was found to have negligently advised a consortium of travel agents on their attempt to win exclusive rights to sell Air India flights in the UK.

The court found that Advani advised the travel agents outside the scope of her employment with DWS, and was acting instead as an independent deal broker.

Advani arranged a £380,000 payment – which the court found was intended to be a bribe in civil law terms – to Ashok Yadav, a former tourism minister for the state of Uttar Pradesh in India, on behalf of the travel agents in 2002. After this, Yadav broke off communications with Advani. No deal was ever signed between the travel agents and Air India.

The travel agents attempted to sue Advani and DWS for negligence and breach of contract, but Mr Justice Hamblen barred their claim after ruling that the court could not allow the claimants to recover compensation for the consequences of their own wrongful act.

In Nayyar & Ors v DWS and Gauri Advani, Mr Justice Hamblen ruled that, but for the illegality defence, the travel agents would have proved negligence and breach of duty by Advani, and Advani would have been liable to reimburse them 80% of the payment. Hamblen said: ‘Whilst Ms Advani owed no general duty to advise the claimants, in circumstances where she was in fact acting as a deal broker and her advice and assistance was being specifically sought I consider that she did owe a duty to exercise reasonable skill and care...’

The judge accepted DWS’s arguments that the firm was not vicariously liable for Advani’s actions, ruling that the travel agents never formally became clients of DWS, and that Advani’s acts were not of a solicitorial nature. He said: ‘The deal broking role carried out by Ms Advani goes far beyond her employed role... It was mainly being carried out for her personal gain rather than that of DWS ... Even if the [illegality] defence could not be relied upon, DWS would not have been in breach of any duty owed to the claimants.’

The travel agents argued that they were innocents and did not appreciate that any impropriety was involved, and that it was
inconceivable to them that a reputable solicitor would involve and encourage them in an improper or illegal transaction.

However, the court held that they were experienced businessmen and that it was obvious that the payment was highly irregular, finding that they knew that the payment was intended as a civil law bribe.

Patrick Pennal, consultant at regional firm Blake Lapthorn which is acting for the claimant travel agents, said that his clients are seeking permission to appeal the decision, but could not comment further.

A spokesman for Denton Wilde Sapte said: ‘We had no knowledge of the matters complained of and first became aware of the allegations when we were served with the claim form.’ A spokeswoman for Eversheds said: ‘The court dismissed the claims made against Gauri Advani and Denton Wilde Sapte awarding costs to both the defendants. As it related to a historical matter involving Ms Advani's former employers, it is inappropriate for us to comment further.’ Ms Advani declined to comment further.