(Bloomberg) – Barclays Plc is trying to pay a former senior banker more than £3.5 million ($4.6 million) of deferred payments to a former senior banker after retirement from a lender, and then work in a hedge fund.
Kamal Sandhu and Barclays traded London lawsuits in legal disputes that suspended his accession to U.S. hedge fund Point72 asset management. Sandhu, head of credit transactions in the Central, Eastern Europe, the Middle East and Africa, left Barclays to take care of his sick son in May 2023, but health care costs soared months later and began working in hedge funds several months later.
According to his attorney, Sandhu was delayed from payments between 2024 and 2027, as part of his retirement agreement. The clause also states that he does not allow retirement to take on roles among possible competitors.
The bank’s lawyers say that uninvested deferred compensation will fail once Sandhu is a portfolio manager at Point72. The bank denies Sandhu was misled. However, Sando’s lawyer argued in court documents that his role in hedge funds was completely different from his job at Barclays, and that 72 did not compete with the bank.
After 14 years at Barclays, Sandhu left his table for $300 million after his “Excellent” performance in 2022, making $120 million for the bank himself. Despite the challenging situations at home, his son can suffer for eight hours a day.
A spokesman for Sandhu and Barclays declined to comment on the ongoing case.
Barclays noted in court documents that if the bank resigns and Sandhu is “treated more popular” by a “more popular” professional retirement, the stock and cash rewards that the banker has not invested in will fail.
Last year, Sandhu sued the bank for the first time in a London employment court in search of a free amount. Barclays filed a lawsuit against Sandhu in the High Court, holding that the court had no jurisdiction to hear the case. It asked the judge to declare that Sandhu had not complied with the conditions of retirement and was not entitled to payment.
Sandhu and Barclays alleged “jurisdiction shopping” with each other, meaning bringing the case to a forum where litigants see better opportunities for success.
Sandhu’s lawyers say Barclays are trying to push Sandhu’s legal fees and prevent him from pursuing his rights. His lawyer said the bank hopes for “a tactical advantage of a major financial nature for fathers of children with severe disabilities,” he said.
“The claimant is in charge of jurisdiction over shopping, actually the defendants do so, further with the fact that they do so for improper purposes, which is without merit,” the bank’s attorney said.
Point72 is not a party to the case, nor is it accused of any misconduct.
More stories like this are available Bloomberg.com
