Reform UK treasurer’s company awarded £4.6m in damages from technology start-up

Reform UK treasurer Nick Candy’s company should receive more than £4.6 million in damages after being lied to “repeatedly and determinedly” to invest in a technology start-up, a High Court judge has ruled.

Candy Ventures Sarl (CVS), a portfolio of companies founded by Mr Candy, took legal action against Dutch businessman Robert Bonnier over allegations he “lied” to “deceive” it into investing around 7.5 million euro (£6.5 million) in Aaqua BV, which he directs.

Barristers for the company told a trial last month that Mr Bonnier claimed the firm would be the “next Facebook” and that Apple and LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton (LVMH) were set to invest one billion US dollars in Aaqua.

This led to CVS signing three agreements with Aaqua, which saw it swap shares in podcasting firm Audioboom for “worthless” shares in Aaqua.

The company asked a judge to rescind the investment or order Mr Bonnier and Aaqua to pay £5.7 million in damages.

On Wednesday, Mr Justice Bright ordered CVS was entitled to £4,623,919 in damages, as well as interest, which must be paid within 28 days.

In a 30-page ruling, the judge said: “During the trial, Mr Bonnier confirmed that he was not involved in active negotiations with either Apple or LVMH representatives concerning imminent investment in Aaqua.

“Thus, I am satisfied that the representations were false, and he knew them to be false when he made them.

“I am satisfied that Mr Bonnier intended CVS to rely on his representation.”

He continued: “I am also satisfied that the representations in fact induced CVS to enter into the three agreements, and then to invest in Aaqua.”

Mr Bonnier represented himself at trial and, in August, was blocked from defending the claim for breaching court orders.

He told the court in London that while he “overstated the prospects of an investment” into Aaqua, he did not believe CVS would “rely” on it.

But Mr Justice Bright said: “The only explanation for Mr Bonnier lying so repeatedly and determinedly was in order to secure CVS’s investment.”

He continued: “The defendants had no realistic way of attracting investment, or of generating income, except by misrepresenting the position to any potential investor.”

At a hearing dealing with the consequences of the judgment on Wednesday, Mr Bonnier failed in a bid to delay having to pay damages.

He also told the hearing that he had “personally spent £3.5 million” on the legal battle.

In written submissions for the trial, Jonathan Nash KC, for CVS, said that Aaqua, which is now insolvent, was established in the Netherlands in 2020 to develop a “new social media software application”.

Mr Bonnier was claimed to have told Mr Candy and Steven Smith, CVS’s executive director, that Apple and LVMH were set to invest in the start-up, which Mr Smith told the court was “completely fundamental” to CVS’s decision to invest.

CVS agreed in February 2021 to transfer 1.5 million shares in Audioboom to Aaqua, worth around £6.5 million.

It also agreed to purchase 15,000 Aaqua shares, which were believed to be worth around 7.5 million euro (£6.5 million), but Mr Nash said the value of these was “false and artificial, induced, as it was, by Aaqua and Mr Bonnier’s fraud”.

Mr Candy, who was announced as Reform UK’s treasurer in December last year, owns 90% of CVS.

Giving evidence, he said that Mr Bonnier’s “blatant lies” about Apple and LVMH’s investment were “a very good story”, but stated: “It is disgraceful what has happened.”

He said: “I look stupid here now in court, but he was so believable and not just believable to investors, but believable to employees who left high-paid jobs.”

He continued: “We want justice for them.”

In written submissions, Mr Bonnier admitted “selling his aspirations for Aaqua very enthusiastically, and occasionally perhaps going too far in those efforts”.

But he said he had a “proven track record of ‘pulling off the impossible’ and creating substantial value for shareholders”.

Following the judgment, Mr Candy said in a statement that the ruling was a “clear vindication”.

He said: “It gave me no satisfaction to come to court.

“But this was about accountability and the truth and for justice to prevail.

“I pursued this claim not only to recover losses, but to expose fraudulent behaviour that has hurt many others who lacked the means to fight back.

“The scale of the harm done by Mr Bonnier is enormous and could not simply be ignored.”