Twitter icon Email alerts icon Latest News RSS icon Magazine icon Stay connected:

View the article online at http://citywire.co.uk/wealth-manager/article/a750122

Brewin v Charles Stanley: A leading employment lawyer's verdict

by Elaine Aarons on May 09, 2014 at 10:27

Brewin v Charles Stanley: A leading employment lawyer's verdict

Wealth Manager has asked one of Britain’s leading employment lawyers to review a case that has potentially profound ramifications for the UK wealth management industry.

We revealed in April that Brewin Dolphin is suing Charles Stanley and six former Brewin staff who quit to join its rival last year.

The High Court writ accused the six, who previously worked at Brewin’s Leicester office, of breaching their contracts and fiduciary responsibilities, and conspiring with Charles Stanley to cause losses to Brewin’s business by ‘unlawful means’. Charles Stanley denies the claims.

It is a case that the whole industry is watching with interest because it could set precedents on how wealth management companies go about hiring in teams.

Elaine Aarons (pictured), a partner at Withers, has reviewed both the writ and the defence. Here she provides her independent opinion on the merits, tactics and likely outcome of the case.

'Long gone are the days when people worked for the same employer for their entire career. However, not surprisingly, individuals who work together successfully often form strong bonds and can end up working together for decades – but not always for the same employer. 

So it was to be expected that the team recruited by Brewin Dolphin between 2000 and 2005 would, when the time came to move on, be likely to move together. Some had worked together for almost 25 years. 

In 2012 they did move as a team, to competitor Charles Stanley. Brewin promptly brought a damages claim in the High Court against the team and Charles Stanley – basically for the fact they had the audacity to move.

The irony is that when three of the team joined Brewin from Quilter in 2005, they claim, Brewin had asked them to resign in exactly the same way.

Team moves have become difficult to pull off in recent years, due to the way the law has developed, and any litigation almost always starts with an application for an emergency injunction to stop the employees making the move. But by the time the claim was presented, it looks like it was too late for Brewin to make such an application. So the claim is for damages only.

Sign in / register to view full article on one page

1 comment so far. Why not have your say?

Philip Milton

May 09, 2014 at 11:23

Most curious to see a legal professional prepared to add opinion and comment whilst a case may be ongoing - very dangerous indeed from what i understood? Then, I am not a lawyer!

report this

leave a comment

Please sign in here or register here to comment. It is free to register and only takes a minute or two.

News sponsored by:

Sponsored Video: Bringing it all back home


As the UK coalition government strives to rebalance the national economy, so called 'reshoring' looks set to play an increasingly important role in economic recovery.

Today's top headlines

Sponsored Video: Barings on investing in Frontier Markets


From Nigeria to Pakistan and from Kenya to Kuwait, frontier markets are catching investors' attention as never before.

On the road

Click here to find out more from the Audience Development team.

Sorry, this link is not
quite ready yet