Jes Staley loses bid to have US investor lawsuit over Epstein ties thrown out

Keep knowledgeable with free updatesSimply signal as much as the UK banks myFT Digest — delivered on to your inbox.Former Barclays chief Jes Staley has failed to influence a California court docket to throw out an investor lawsuit over his ties to Jeffrey Epstein, in the identical week that he misplaced a separate UK court docket battle over his ties to the late intercourse offender. Staley, Barclays and its chair Nigel Higgins had requested the California court docket to dismiss a declare by a bunch of traders in Barclays’ US securities, which alleges that they misrepresented Staley’s relationship with Epstein and due to this fact inflated the value of Barclays’ New York-traded American depositary receipts, which later fell. A decide rejected that try this week, saying statements by the financial institution and by Staley on an earnings name have been probably deceptive. It means the US class motion case, which is being led by a New York Metropolis staff’ union and a St Louis firefighters’ retirement system, can go forward, although the decide dismissed one depend in opposition to the financial institution and one a part of the declare that associated solely to Higgins declining to touch upon Staley’s departure from the financial institution. The financial institution declined to remark. Requests for remark made to Staley and Higgins through their attorneys weren’t instantly returned.The California ruling mentioned that in Barclays’ 2019 annual report and a 2020 press launch, the financial institution mentioned Staley “developed an expert relationship with Mr. Epstein”. This was “probably deceptive” as a result of a “affordable investor who learn the board’s statements wouldn’t assume that Staley and Epstein had a private relationship”, it mentioned.The financial institution “contends that publications opined in any other case, so traders shouldn’t have been misled”, in line with the ruling. Staley had requested the court docket to contemplate articles revealed within the Monetary Instances, the New York Instances and the Monetary Mail on Sunday about his ties to Epstein, which the court docket agreed to do.This argument “misses the purpose”, district decide Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong mentioned, for the reason that press launch and annual report have been a response to an article within the New York Instances and the financial institution was attempting “to set the file straight about Staley and Epstein’s relationship after doing their very own due diligence.” The choice caps a tough week for Staley who on Thursday discovered that his bid to overturn a lifetime ban from the UK’s Monetary Conduct Authority had failed. All through a month-long trial in London earlier this yr, Staley sought to attract a effective line between an expert and private relationship concerning his ties to Epstein; a distinction rejected by the Higher Tribunal that heard his authorized problem.RecommendedThe class-action lawsuit undermines Barclays’ makes an attempt to attract a line underneath the Epstein saga, which has hung over the financial institution for nearly six years. Higgins testified in the course of the UK trial in March because the decide tried to find out whether or not the financial institution had had a full image of Staley’s relationship with Epstein. Staley claimed he had been clear with each Higgins and Bob Hoyt, group normal counsel on the time, about his ties to Epstein via varied conversations with the 2 males and different senior executives at Barclays. Nonetheless, Higgins mentioned throughout his proof that he now had “a unique image” of Staley and Epstein’s relationship primarily based on the brand new data now accessible to him.