header-logo header-logo

27 October 2016
Issue: 7720 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Bankers lose their bonuses

Two former City bankers have lost their appeal against Investec Bank for multi-million pound bonuses in Brogden & Anor v Investec [2016] EWCA Civ 1031.

The former head and deputy head of Investec’s structured equity derivatives desk argued they had agreed to move to the bank after being promised bonuses of £6.2m and £3.8m, respectively, in their first year of employment, on top of their salary. They claimed that, in subsequent years, they were told their bonus would depend on the profitability of the desk.

The dispute centred on the meaning of “economic value added”, on the basis of which their bonuses were to be calculated.

The bankers said the bonuses should relate to how much the bank benefited from their activities, best calculated by referring to the cost to the bank if it had raised an equivalent amount on the capital markets. They argued that the chief executive of Investec had made an oral agreement with them that special provisions would apply when determining their bonuses.The bank countered that its established practice was to take all areas of activity into account and base bonuses on profits for the business as a whole.

Matthew Shankland, partner at Sidley Austin, which acted for Investec, said: “The judges have made it clear that the courts should not strain contractual construction to find discretions which do not exist. They have ensured that this claim did not undermine the bank’s longstanding policies and clear contractual arrangements with employees.”

Issue: 7720 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll