The Commercial Court has dismissed a €50 million fraud and conspiracy claim following a seven-week trial before Mr Justice Jacobs.

The Claimants were Luca Cordero di Montezemolo (the former Chairman of Ferrari); his son, Matteo Cordero di Montezemolo; and G.I. Globinvestment Limited (“GIG”), the family company used by the di Montezemolo family to make and hold investments. They brought claims against ten defendants including Daniele Migani, a wealth manager and owner of XY UK ERS Limited (“XY”) and Federico Faleschini, a former senior executive at the XY Group, and current board director of Twinkle Capital SA (“Twinkle”).

The claims arose out of investments made in a Luxembourg alternative investment fund called the “Skew Base Fund”, for sophisticated investors, as well as other similar investments made outside the Skew Base Fund. A significant portion of the Claimants’ investments collapsed in March 2020 during the market turbulence caused by the Covid-19 pandemic.

The Claimants alleged that Mr Faleschini, together with Mr Migani, fraudulently made representations at initial meetings in 2016 which were attended by the Claimants or their representatives. It was said that Mr Faleschini made representations about XY’s independence and that in relation to the unlawful means conspiracy claim, Mr Faleschini was a co-conspirator with all of the other Defendants including Mr Migani, XY, Twinkle, and two fund management entities.

The deceit claims against Mr Faleschini collapsed during cross-examination when Matteo di Montezemolo gave evidence that he had never relied on anything that Mr Faleschini had said and Luca di Montezemolo said that he did not know who Mr Faleschini was (see [106] of the Court’s judgment). Notwithstanding the discontinuance of the deceit claims against Mr Faleschini by those Claimants, GIG pursued its fraudulent misrepresentation claims and both GIG and Matteo di Montezemolo continued the unlawful means conspiracy claims for the remainder of trial.

In a 342-page judgment, Mr Justice Jacobs analyses each of the claims advanced against Mr Faleschini and all of the other Defendants before dismissing the claims in their entirety.  He agreed with the Defendants’ submissions that there was an element of “reverse engineering” of the claim “i.e. advancing a case on the basis of the result to be achieved, rather than on the basis of the actual facts”. The judgment clears Mr Faleschini entirely of the serious allegations of fraud and conspiracy made against him.

Philip Ahlquist represented Mr Faleschini as sole counsel throughout the proceedings, instructed by Tim Elliss and Krupa Vekaria of Enyo Law LLP.

A copy of the judgment is available here.