The conclusion of the case of Expert Tooling and Automation Limited v Engie Power Limited marks a significant change in how business energy commission claims will be approached going forward. With the appeal resolved in favour of Expert Tooling, businesses now have much stronger footing when challenging undisclosed or inadequately disclosed commission arrangements in the energy market.
The outcome follows directly from the Supreme Court’s judgment in Hopcraft v Close Brothers Ltd [2025]. In light of that decision, the parties accepted that the earlier Court of Appeal ruling in the Expert Tooling case could not be maintained. The Supreme Court has since formally allowed the appeal and entered judgment for the claimant.
The Court also dismissed Engie’s cross appeal outright, making clear that it raised no arguable legal issue. This further underlines the strength of the Court’s position and sends a clear message to the market about the standards expected in commission based arrangements.
At the heart of the decision is the Supreme Court’s firm stance on fiduciary duties. Where a fiduciary relationship exists, the Court has confirmed that consent must be fully informed to be effective. Partial disclosure, technical explanations or reliance on industry practice will not be enough to avoid liability.
For a prolonged period, many energy brokers and suppliers operated in an environment where commission structures were poorly explained or not disclosed at all. This lack of transparency has now been firmly addressed, leaving those practices exposed to legal challenge.
This ruling represents a turning point in tackling energy mis selling. It reinforces the requirement for openness and places businesses in a far stronger position to challenge unfair conduct supported by clear Supreme Court authority.
David Bartell of Expert Technologies Group, the claimant, welcomed the clarity the ruling brings. He said:
“Expert Technologies Group welcomes the Supreme Court’s ruling in our favour in the case concerning undisclosed commissions paid by Engie to the broker.
“From the outset, our objective has always been to ensure full transparency and to uphold the principle that brokers must act in the best interests of their customers. The ruling confirms that customers are entitled to complete and informed disclosure when brokers receive payments on their behalf, and that failing to provide such transparency constitutes a breach of duty. We are pleased that the Court has recognised the importance of openness and fairness within the energy brokerage industry.”
The decision delivers long awaited certainty to the sector. By clarifying liability and removing previous legal ambiguity, it opens the door for energy commission claims to progress efficiently and at scale.
For affected businesses, the message is unambiguous. The highest court has now settled the issue, and the opportunity to pursue recovery is firmly in place.