Key Facts
- •Alexander Hamilton invested US$698,888 in the Currency Club, a foreign exchange futures enterprise.
- •The Currency Club was run by Mark and Claire Barrow and Martin Welsh, among others.
- •Hamilton claimed fraudulent misrepresentation, breach of contract, and conspiracy.
- •The Currency Club lacked formal documentation and transparent accounting practices.
- •Hamilton claimed Welsh misrepresented how funds were held, implying they were in a regulated FXPro PAMM account.
- •Other investors provided similar testimony of misrepresentations regarding fund control.
- •The Currency Club ultimately collapsed, and Hamilton lost his investment.
- •The court found a partnership existed between the Barrow's and Welsh and other section leaders.
- •Claire Barrow was found to be a partner in the Currency Club.
- •Individual investors were clients of the head partnership, not partners themselves.
Legal Principles
Definition of partnership
Partnership Act 1890, s. 1(1)
Agency between partners
Partnership Act 1890, s. 5
Liability of firm for wrongs of a partner
Partnership Act 1890, s. 10
Standard of proof in deceit cases
Re H (Minors) [1996] AC 563
Reliance in misrepresentation
BV Nederlandse Industrie Van Eiproducten v Rembrandt Enterprises Inc [2019] EWCA Civ 596; Autonomy Corporation Limited & Ors v Lynch and Anor [2022] EWHC 1178 (Ch)
Outcomes
Defendants found jointly and severally liable for damages.
Misrepresentation by Welsh regarding fund control and breach of contract.
Partnership found to exist between Barrow's and Welsh and other section leaders.
Close collaboration, shared resources, and joint decision-making.
Claire Barrow found to be a partner.
Active role in the management and administration of the Currency Club.
Conspiracy claim largely dismissed.
Insufficient evidence to prove a general agreement to mislead investors.
Trust claim withdrawn by Hamilton.
Claimant no longer pursuing this action.