UT (Tax & Chancery) UT-2023-000064 - [2025] UKUT 00203 (TCC)

Mr Staley’s case is that that scope of the enquiry made by Mr Davidson on 15 August 2019 was focussed on the steps Barclays had taken to understand whether Mr Staley was aware of or had participated in the criminal misconduct alleged against Mr Epstein. The enquiry, and the response to it, is characterised by Mr Staley in Mr Smith’s opening submissions as:

“intended to achieve only one purpose, which was to inform the Authority that neither Mr Staley nor Barclays had had any knowledge of or involvement in Mr Epstein’s unlawful conduct. It was not intended to define the relationship between Mr Staley and Mr Epstein…”

It is contended that the enquiry to which Barclays was responding was very narrow and restricted which defined the terms of its response.

The Authority’s position is that the enquiry was broad in scope and was plainly seeking an assurance regarding the nature of the association between Mr Staley and Mr Epstein (and between Barclays and Mr Epstein) as well as an understanding as to how Barclays had satisfied itself there was no impropriety to the relationship. The enquiry was not ambiguous in the information sought, nor was it narrowly defined or limited to seeking information regarding knowledge of or involvement in unlawful conduct as suggested.