In a case that attracted national media coverage and emphasises the crucial importance of regulatory compliance and the highest standards of professional conduct in the financial services sector, the High Court dismissed a breach of contract claim brought by an investment manager.
What happened?
- The Claimant, Mr Palmeri, was an associate and self-employed investment manager at the Defendant, Charles Stanley, for over 20 years. He was very successful. He employed his own team and considered them to be a self-contained business. In return for a proportion of their client revenue, the firm provided the team with office space, back-office services and the regulatory approvals they needed. The firm then decided to change its operating model and take a larger slice of their revenue, requiring him to sign up to new terms or leave.
- The Claimant was called into an unscheduled meeting at which he was presented with two envelopes to choose from; one containing the new terms and, the other, a letter terminating his engagement with immediate effect. He reacted very strongly to the ultimatum, alleging that he had been ambushed and proceeded to shout, swear and disparage the competence of the firm’s management, also questioning their integrity using very strong and personally abusive language.
- The Claimant asked to speak with his team before expressing his decision, which he was allowed to do. He then returned to the meeting stating that he would reluctantly accept the new terms. However, he was told that his earlier behaviour was so inappropriate and unacceptable that his relationship with the firm was irretrievably broken. The offer of the new terms was therefore withdrawn and his engagement terminated with immediate effect.
- After the Claimant left, the firm discovered a number of breaches by him of their internal compliance policies which, it argued, of themselves amounted to misconduct that would have justified summary termination of his engagement, even if his behaviour in the above meeting did not.
Outcome
The claim failed. The Court held that the Claimant’s conduct (breach of the firm’s bullying and harassment policy and of its regulatory compliance manual) amounted to serious misconduct justifying summary termination. He was in breach of trust and confidence, which the Court held “is essential to the continuation of any contractual relationship, and cannot survive sustained, angry and open disaffection… In particular, disaffection of this sort is not compatible with a contract in which mutual trust and confidence is essential to the operation of [FCA] regulatory obligations.”
The Claimant acknowledged that his behaviour in the meeting was unacceptable but sought to contextualise it by saying that similar behaviour and vocabulary are commonplace in city finance and that his own passionate and volatile personality was well known and unfairly exploited by the firm. However, the Court concluded that “even if Charles Stanley had not had a sound basis for summary termination of contract going into that meeting, Mr Palmeri thereby provided one”.
Breaches of compliance rules
On investigation of the Claimant’s emails after he left, the firm discovered that he had engaged in loan activities with clients (involving five or six figure sums) which he had not disclosed to Charles Stanley. Mr Palmeri sought to explain these as personal matters between friends which had nothing to do with Charles Stanley and did not fall within their compliance policies.
In summary:
- Conflicts of interest: The compliance manual required all associates to disclose to Charles Stanley details of any potential conflicts of interest. The Court agreed with Charles Stanley that there had been a substantial breach of internal reporting obligations. Regardless of whether the loans were with “friends who happen to be clients” or “clients who happen to be friends”, it is their status as clients which has legal consequences and which must come first.
- Complaints handling: One loan involved the Claimant giving an unhappy client and friend a personal, interest free loan of £10,000 as a way of dealing with an issue (the client had instructed him to sell some shares from his portfolio, which he failed to do). Rather than report this in accordance with the firm’s complaints handling procedure, again his position was that this was an entirely personal matter and that the client had never intended to have it formally reviewed. However, the Court held that the client’s unhappiness had triggered reporting obligations under the firm’s policy.
- Credit broking: In a matter involving a family, more than one member of which was a client of the firm, the Claimant proposed an ingenious solution involving one member of the family giving a loan to another, guaranteed by another member of the family on the security of their portfolio. All the parties were delighted. However, on investigation the firm found that the loan was a “regulated credit agreement” and that the activity of proposing it amounted to “credit broking” which is a regulated activity which the firm was not authorised to undertake. This was therefore in breach of the compliance manual which prohibited associates from undertaking such activity.
Ultimately, the Court found that Mr Palmeri had engaged in a “sustained and significant pattern of unreported potential conflicts of interest, a serious breach of complaint handling procedure, and evidence of unauthorised credit broking” which, individually and collectively entitled Charles Stanley to terminate his engagement with immediate effect.
Comment
The facts of this case occurred when the approved persons regime was still in force, before the extension of the Senior Managers and Certification Regime (SMCR) across the financial services sector. With regulatory reference obligations now in play across the sector, and the making of fit and proper assessments outsourced to employers, the importance of observing the highest standards of professional conduct is greater than ever.
Further Information
If you would like any further information or advice about the issues explored in this blog, please contact Andreas White, Özlem Mehmet or another member of our Employment team.
About the Authors
Andreas is a partner in our employment team. He has substantial litigation experience, with a particular focus on complex and high value employment and partnership disputes. Andreas has a particular interest in international and cross border employment law. He is a former president of the labour law commission of AIJA.
Özlem is a Professional Support Lawyer in our Employment Team. Before joining Kingsley Napley, Özlem was a Tutor and Team Leader at BPP University’s Law School, teaching on the Legal Practice Course. She taught the Employment Law, Business Law & Practice, Corporate Finance and Equity Finance modules of the course, as well as the skills modules of Interviewing & Advising and Professional Conduct & Regulation.
Latest blogs & news
Preparing for changes to non-disclosure agreements from 1 October 2025
In June the Ministry of Justice announced new legislation under the Victims and Prisoners Act 2024 which affects NDAs and confidentiality clauses.* Related guidance, published at the beginning of June, sets out the impact of this legislation on the enforceability of such agreements.
Managing digital nomads: What UK employers need to know
Digital nomadism - working remotely from outside the UK - is on the rise. Some estimates suggest 165,000 British citizens are living and working abroad as digital nomads for on average seven months of the year. But allowing staff to work overseas, even temporarily, can trigger a complex mix of immigration, tax, and employment law issues.
The Employment Rights Bill Tracker
The UK’s Employment Rights Bill, described as “the biggest upgrade to workers’ rights in a generation,” was unveiled in October 2024. In December, we provided an overview of its key provisions and their implications for both employers and employees.
New UK crypto regime takes a step closer
HM Treasury has published a draft statutory instrument which, when brought into force, will introduce a new regulatory regime for cryptoassets in the UK.
The New Right to Neonatal Care Leave and Pay – What Employers Need to Know
From 6 April 2025, the Neonatal Care (Leave and Pay) Act 2023 introduces statutory rights for employees whose babies require neonatal care. With around 1 in 7 babies admitted to neonatal care after birth, the government estimates these rights will support 60,000 parents annually.
Making redundancy consultation count: a look at the principles behind the Court of Appeal decision in De Bank Haycocks v ADP RPO UK Ltd
In a judgment in October 2024 in the case of De Bank Haycocks v ADP RPO UK Ltd [2024] EWCA Civ 1291, the Court of Appeal confirmed that general workforce consultations over redundancies of less than 20 employees in non-unionised workforces are not compulsory and that the fairness of a redundancy process must be assessed on a case-by-case basis.
What does a recent Court of Appeal ruling on the case of a sacked Christian school worker mean for businesses?
The Court of Appeal’s recent decision in the case of Higgs v Farmor’s School is a significant development in the law relating to religion and belief discrimination and managing conflicting views in the workplace.
Is the FCA’s name and shame policy now dead in the water?
On 6 February the House of Lords Financial Services Regulation Committee published its response to the latest iteration of the FCA’s proposals to “name and shame” firms under investigation by the regulator.
Supporting staff when they need it most
Swiss-American psychiatrist, theorist of the five stages of grief, and pioneer of palliative care, Dr Elisabeth Kübler-Ross, once explained that you never “get over” losing a loved one; it forever forms a part of you. It is profoundly and irrevocably changing, and is as personal to you as your fingerprint.
Employment Rights Bill: how it could transform the UK
The UK’s new Employment Rights Bill, labelled as “the biggest upgrade to workers’ rights in a generation”, was unveiled in October 2024. The Bill represents a transformative shift in labour legislation, aimed at modernising employment practices and offering enhanced protections for employees.
SRA Guidance – internal investigations and guidance for in-house advisers
On 18 November 2024, the SRA published its updated and now finalised guidance on internal investigations.
Protected Conversations under section 111A of the Employment Rights Act
The recent EAT Judgment in Gallagher v McKinnon’s Auto and Tyres Limited is a useful decision for employers, having upheld the employer’s position regarding the inadmissibility of evidence relating to what was said in some pre-termination negotiations.
Named respondents liable even if employer is also found to be liable
Miss C Baldwin (CB) was employed by Cleves School (the school) as a newly qualified
teacher (NQT) from September 2014 until CB’s resignation on March 18, 2015. Ms Miller
was designated CB’s mentor. Mr Hodges was the headteacher of the school.
Because of ill health, at the time of accepting the role CB had not completed her
postgraduate certificate in education (PGCE). CB had a number of absences during her
first term at the school.
Preventing sexual harassment in the workplace – how to prepare for the party season
I appreciate that the festive season is still a way off but, for some employers, the time is nigh for planning the staff Christmas party—booking the venue, sorting the entertainment, and mentally bracing for Chris Rae on repeat. For most, the next couple of months will be a time of merriment—of taking stock, being thankful for what you have, and planning for the year ahead. Unfortunately, for employment lawyers, we are likely to see an uplift in our workload as December approaches and Christmas party merriment crosses the line into misconduct. I don’t mean to be a killjoy, but it happens every year. Without fail.
Extra time
Waqar Shah and Andy Norris analyse the latest decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Professional Game Match Officials Ltd, which has been referred back to the First-tier Tribunal.
Finfluencers – in the FCA’s sights
In March 2024 the FCA published a clear warning to those advertising trading and investments on social media about the risks of doing so, making it clear that it will “will take action against those touting financial products illegally.” Just two months later, in May 2024, the regulator announced that it had commenced criminal proceedings against a number of individuals for advertising foreign trading schemes on their social media platforms.
Modern families and their rights at work – how we can help
For many of us, balancing the responsibilities we have at home and at work can be demanding. For modern families this balancing act can create very real challenges, which are different for each member of a family as they navigate their way through parenthood.
What Can Employers and Workers Expect From the Labour Government?
Our employment law experts Nikola Southern and Kirsty Churm take a look at what we know so far about the Government's main EMployment law proposals and what they might mean for employers and workers
100 Years of Employment Law in the UK and France
Inspired by Olympic fever in France and around the world this summer, the Anglo-French group has prepared comparative timelines of impactful employment laws in France and England since the 1924 Olympic Games in Paris.
France has been celebrating the return of the Jeux Olympiques to Paris after 100 years with a flamboyant opening ceremony along the Seine and an impressive medal hold. The Paralympic Games will conclude on Sunday and have seen more than 4,000 athletes competing in 549 medal events. It is only 12 years ago that Britain was itself embracing the excitement and spirit of the games at home in London.
In honour of the Games’ return to France, and with employment law reforms looming in the UK, we have prepared a timeline showing key dates on employment law across each side of the Channel.
Motor finance: FCA drives towards formal redress scheme
The FCA is conducting a review into whether motor finance customers were overcharged as a result of the widespread use of discretionary commission arrangements in the motor finance industry. It had expected to set out its next steps in light of this review in September 2024. However, it has announced that it will not now do so until May 2025.
You may also be interested in:
We welcome views and opinions about the issues raised in this blog. Should you require specific advice in relation to personal circumstances, please use the form on the contact page.
Share insightLinkedIn X Facebook Email to a friend Print