Legal News

Summary judgment given to former senior executives of Lloyds Bank over unpaid long-term incentive plan awards (Daniels & Anor v Lloyds Bank Plc & Anor)

Summary judgment given to former senior executives of Lloyds Bank over unpaid long-term incentive plan awards (Daniels & Anor v Lloyds Bank Plc & Anor)
Published on: 28 March 2018
Published by: LexisPSL
  • Summary judgment given to former senior executives of Lloyds Bank over unpaid long-term incentive plan awards (Daniels & Anor v Lloyds Bank Plc & Anor)
  • What are the practical implications of this case?
  • What was the background?
  • What did the Court decide?
  • Was the LTIP validly amended?
  • When did the awards vest?
  • Was there an unlawful exercise of discretion?
  • Does the operation of an exclusion clause prevent the claimants from seeking the relief sought in any event?
  • Do the agreements reached by each claimant with the defendants preclude an otherwise valid exercise of the Malus Clause (Rule 6.4)?
  • Case details

Article summary

Share Incentives analysis: The High Court found that Lloyds Banking Group’s defences have no real prospects of success, and held that the claimants’ applications for summary judgment succeed. As a result, Lloyds Banking Group will have to pay nearly £3 million to its former chief executive and another director after it attempted to withhold payments due from the company’s long-term incentive plan (LTIP) through the use of a malus clause. or take a trial to read the full analysis.

Popular documents