UT (Tax & Chancery) UT-2022-0000150 - [2024] UKUT 00254 (TCC)
Fecha: 10-Jul-2024
Mr Kalaris’s approach to regulatory requirements in the past
Mr Kalaris’s approach to regulatory requirements in the past
Some of the references included statements that Mr Kalaris had been supportive of regulatory compliance during the years before 2014. For example, Mr Chester B Feldberg. who worked with Mr Kalaris between 2000 and 2008 in his role as Chairman of Barclays’ Governance and Control Committee, said he could rely on Mr Kalaris to “take prompt and effective action” to address any weaknesses in Barclays’ governance procedures. Sir David Walker, Barclays’ Chairman from 2012, said Mr Kalaris had “an acute and well-developed capacity to determine and chart the ethically right course in any business situation even where this might have at least short-term negative consequences”, and gave two examples. Mr Richard Berliand, who had previously worked under Mr Kalaris at JP Morgan, said he “consistently promoted a culture of regulatory respect and compliance”.
However, none of the referees were called as witnesses in these proceedings and so could not be cross-examined. Moreover, this evidence all relates to the period before the Interviews, in the course of which we have found Mr Kalaris to have been dishonest and lacking candour. We find that the evidence given by the referees as to Mr Kalaris’s approach to regulatory compliance in the period before 2014 does not form a reliable basis for making a finding of fact about Mr Kalaris’s fitness and propriety at the time of the Decision or, indeed, at the time of this judgment.
- Heading
- Introduction and Summary
- The Barclays references
- The Tribunal’s view
- Subsequently
- Legislation, case law and the Handbook
- The legislation and related case law
- The Handbook
- The Decision Notice
- Evidence
- The evidence on the capital raising issue
- Mr Beauchamp
- Mr Tinney
- Mr Perry
- Mr Mason
- Mr Biesinger
- Findings of fact
- Mr Kalaris
- Capital raising, GenVen and the Interviews
- The criminal proceedings
- Saranac
- The SWF initiative
- The economic situation
- The ASA
- The link between the ASA and the capital raising
- The text of the ASA
- The Prospectus
- The second capital raising and PCP
- The 2013 Interview
- What Mr Kalaris knew
- What the Authority knew
- What Mr Kalaris believed about the Authority’s knowledge
- Mr Kalaris’s responses relied on by the Authority
- Question 1: The “genesis of the agreement”
- Q1: The Authority’s position
- Who came up with the idea?
- The two paths
- Strategic relationship
- Unnecessary?
- The Tribunal’s findings
- Question 2: the purpose
- Q2: The Authority’s position
- Q2: Saranac’s position
- Q2: The Tribunal’s findings
- Question 3: the calculation
- Q3: The Authority’s position
- Q3: Saranac’s position
- Q3: The Tribunal’s findings
- Question 4: connection
- Q4: Saranac’s position
- Q4: The Tribunal’s findings
- Motive?
- Overall conclusion on the 2013 Interview
- THE 2014 INTERVIEW
- The culture at Barclays Wealth Americas
- The cultural audit
- The pre-meeting communications
- Briefing and the subsequent meetings
- Ms Hilgart
- The Cultural Workshop
- The Whistleblower email
- The Fed update
- The 2014 Interview
- The position of the parties
- Discussion and consideration
- The briefing on 30 March 2012
- The meeting on 5 April
- The meeting on 10 December 2012
- The weekend of 14-15 December 2012
- Overall findings
- OTHER FINDINGS
- The other evidence
- The Saranac assessment
- The personal references
- The capital raising and the GenVen Report
- Financial services experience
- Mr Kalaris’s approach to regulatory requirements in the past
- Compliance with restrictions
- Training
- The standing of the NEDs
- Mr Elliott
- Mr Neilly
- The Tribunal’s conclusion
- Conclusions