UT (Tax & Chancery) UT-2023-000064 - [2025] UKUT 00203 (TCC)
Fecha: 03-Abr-2025
What is not in issue in this reference
What is not in issue in this reference
As the Authority made absolutely clear, the focus in this reference is on what was communicated to it in its capacity as Mr Staley’s and Barclays’ regulator and the conduct required of those who hold senior positions in the financial services sector.
It should be emphasised that it is no part of the Authority’s case that Mr Staley was either involved in any of the serious acts of sexual misconduct attributed to Mr Epstein or that he committed similar acts himself. Nor does the Authority allege that Mr Staley was aware of such misconduct on the part of Mr Epstein. As is clear from the summary of the Authority’s case, as set out at [10] to [20] of its Statement of Case, as set out at [12] above, the Authority’s case relates purely to what it says were misleading statements made in the Letter with Mr Staley’s approval regarding the closeness of Mr Staley’s relationship with Mr Epstein, and the recency of his contact with him.
Accordingly, we will not make any findings in relation to any matters which fall outside the scope of this reference.
- Heading
- INTRODUCTION
- BACKGROUND TO THE REFERENCE
- THE AUTHORITY’S CASE AND MR STALEY’S POSITION
- APPLICABLE LAW AND REGULATORY PROVISIONS
- Rules of conduct
- Prohibition
- Fitness and propriety
- Law relating to integrity
- Financial Penalty
- Step 1: Disgorgement
- ISSUES TO BE DETERMINED AND THE ROLE OF THE TRIBUNAL
- Issues to be determined
- Context
- What is not in issue in this reference
- Standard and burden of proof
- EVIDENCE
- Mr Staley’s evidence
- Documentary evidence
- FINDINGS OF FACT
- The accuracy of the Statements in the Letter
- The period after Mr Epstein’s conviction until Mr Staley left JPM at the end of 2012
- Mr Epstein simply responded “family”
- The period after Mr Staley left JPM at the end of 2012 until he joined Barclays in 2015
- Evaluation of the relationship
- The recency of the last contact between Mr Staley and Mr Epstein at the time the Letter was written
- What Mr Staley told Barclays about his relationship with Mr Epstein
- Period prior to Mr Epstein’s arrest in July 2019
- Period following Mr Epstein’s arrest on 6 July 2019
- Bowdoin College Talking Points
- The process of drafting of the Bowdoin College Talking Points
- Final version of the Bowdoin College Talking Points
- Content of the final version of the Bowdoin College Talking Points
- Presentation to Bowdoin College
- Conclusion on Barclays’ knowledge of the relationship
- The scope of the Authority’s enquiry in August 2019
- The origin of the Authority’s enquiry
- What was said on the call of 15 August 2019
- Conclusion on the scope of the Authority’s enquiry
- The preparation of the Letter and Mr Staley’s approval of it
- October 2019: Drafting of the Letter
- Second draft
- Telephone calls with Mr Gillies: 2 and 4 October
- The call between Mr Higgins and Mr Davidson on 4 October
- Further drafts: 5 and 6 October
- The call of 7 October between Mr Hoyt and Mr Staley
- Finalisation of the Letter
- THE AUTHORITY’S INVESTIGATION
- The Scope of the Authority’s Initial Enquiry in 2019
- Materiality of the Statements
- Accuracy of the Statements
- Recklessness of approving the Statements
- Whether Mr Staley knew that the Statements were inaccurate
- Whether Mr Staley was aware that there was a risk that the Statements would mislead the Authority
- Conclusions