Staveley and Barclays await legal bill decision as battle continues

Amanda Staveley - Victoria Jones/PA
  • Oops!
    Something went wrong.
    Please try again later.

The long-running fight between Amanda Staveley and Barclays will this week move to a battle over who foots the legal bill after the financier lost one of the most high-profile lawsuits to come out of the financial crisis.

In a High Court ruling, a judge found last month that Barclays was “guilty of serious deceit” in the way it treated Ms Staveley as she scrambled to secure support from Abu Dhabi investors in an emergency 2008 fundraising drive to save the bank from collapse.

However, Mr Justice David Waksman refused her claim for more than £600m in damages as he said there was no real chance the financier would be paid the fees which she claimed that Barclays’ deception had cost her.

A hearing is due to take place on March 11 to determine who pays up for the legal battle. Costs are expected to run to many millions of pounds, a burden which could fall heavily on litigation funder Therium if Ms Staveley’s firm PCP Capital Partners is told to contribute.

If Ms Staveley had won her battle, the litigation funder would have been in line for a massive payday.

Barclays-Amanda Staveley court case timeline
Barclays-Amanda Staveley court case timeline

Ms Staveley sued the bank after her contact Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan, whom she helped buy Manchester City FC, contributed £3.5bn to a blockbuster deal from Middle Eastern investors in 2008 that saved Barclays from the hands of the Government. She claimed her firm, PCP Capital Partners, was treated unfairly because it did not receive the same fees as other Qatari investors, and sought damages of around £660m. Barclays said she was only an adviser rather than an investor.

In his ruling, the judge criticised Barclays’ attempts to discredit Ms Staveley as a lightweight “chancer” who engaged in a “hustle” to get involved in the deal. He said, in his view, she was a “tough, clever and creative entrepreneur”.

Ms Staveley is considering an appeal. After the verdict, she said: “In spite of Barclays’ efforts to question my character and credentials, the court has recognised my abilities as a businesswoman.”

On the day of the result, Barclays said: “We welcome the court’s decision to dismiss PCP’s claim in its entirety and award it no damages.”

Spokesmen for Barclays, Therium and Ms Staveley declined to comment this evening.