Robert Tchenguiz settles long-running battle with SFO for £1.5m
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has settled civil damages claims brought by property tycoon Robert Tchenguiz and his businesses for £1.5m, days after settling with brother Vincent Tchenguiz for £3m
July 31, 2014 at 07:45 AM
4 minute read
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has settled civil damages claims brought by property tycoon Robert Tchenguiz and his businesses for £1.5m, days after settling with brother Vincent for £3m.
The amount, settled out of court, will be paid to Robert Tchenguiz within the next 14 days. The agreement means that a scheduled trial in October will not take place.
SFO director David Green said: "I am pleased that we have been able to resolve this final outstanding matter, without the need for a costly trial. As I said when Mr Vincent Tchenguiz accepted our offer last week, the SFO deeply regrets the errors for which we were criticised by the High Court in July 2012.
"On behalf of the SFO, I also apologise to Robert Tchenguiz for what happened to him. I reiterate that the SFO has changed a great deal since March 2011, and I am determined that the mistakes made over three years ago will not be repeated."
Earlier this month, Robert Tchenguiz replaced counsel from Shearman & Sterling, led by partner Jo Rickard, with a team from Stephenson Harwood, led by commercial litigator Sean Jeffrey, who was already advising Vincent.
Slaughter and May has been representing the SFO since February last year on defending claims totalling as much as £300m. The claims followed the agency's failed investigation into the Tchenguiz brothers (pictured). Slaughters' team is led by disputes partner Jonathan Cotton.
Slaughters instructed Blackstone Chambers' James Eadie QC, Pushpinder Saini QC and James Segan, as well as One Essex Court's Charles Graham QC, Simon Colton and Patricia Burns and 6KBW College Hill's Katherine Hardcastle.
Vincent Tchenguiz agreed to a £3m settlement earlier this week. As part of the agreement the SFO will also pay for legal costs incurred during the long-running dispute, including another £3m towards the final costs figure, within the next month.
Both Robert and Vincent Tchenguiz are now preparing to sue accountancy firm Grant Thornton and other third parties for their part in the investigation, with reports saying claims could reach hundreds of millions of pounds.
Robert Tchenguiz said of his settlement: "I am satisfied that the taxpayer should not bear the full financial pain of the SFO, and its former director's, misguided actions. I believe that the ultimate blame lies elsewhere.
"I do not believe that, without external influences, the SFO would ever have had any possible cause to arrest me for suspected wrongdoing. It is now quite evident that third parties played a major part in this hugely damaging farce.
"Having resolved my issues with the SFO, I now intend to join my brother in pursuing those who I believe to be both responsible and liable for the devastation that has been caused."
A spokesperson for Grant Thornton said: "Grant Thornton has acted appropriately, and in accordance with its professional responsibilities and legal obligations, throughout. Any disclosure made has been accurate and in accordance with those professional and legal obligations.
"It is the responsibility of the investigating agency to review and interpret any information provided to it, and to act as it sees fit. Grant Thornton did not act as advisor to the Serious Fraud Office."
The fraud agency conducted a long-running investigation into the Tchenguiz brothers for suspected impropriety in relation to the failure of Icelandic bank Kaupthing in 2008.
The pair were arrested in March 2011 in a highly-profile dawn raid, but the SFO later conceded there were errors in the evidence it used to obtain search warrants against the brothers.
The High Court quashed the search warrants in 2012 after the brothers challenged the SFO through a judicial review, ruling that the agency's handling of the investigation was unlawful.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLatAm Moves: DLA Piper Chile, Brazil’s Demarest Build Out Disputes Muscle
Kingsley Napley and Lord Pannick Spearhead Private Schools' Challenge to Government VAT Policy
Spain Loses Appeal as London Court Rejects Claim of Immunity in €101 Million Arbitral Award Enforcement
Jones Day Expands European Footprint with Global Disputes Partner in Madrid
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250