Ms. Staveley was served with a bankruptcy petition from businessman Victor Restis, alleging that she owed him £3.4 million stemming from an investment in her business endeavors. As a key figure in the ownership of NUFC, she orchestrated the club’s takeover in 2021. Ms. Staveley sought to dismiss Mr. Restis’ petition through an application to the High Court. Her legal team argued during a hearing in March that she had significant grounds to contest the liability claim and proposed resolving the dispute outside of court.
In a ruling on Monday, Deputy Insolvency and Companies Court Judge Daniel Schaffer rejected her request, stating that the matter should proceed to court and confirming Ms. Staveley’s responsibility to pay the specified amount. Delivering his decision at London’s Rolls Building, he affirmed, “The demand for £3.4 million is valid.”
Following the ruling, Mr. Restis has until April 22 to file a bankruptcy petition unless Ms. Staveley settles the debt before that deadline. Ted Loveday, representing Ms. Staveley, had earlier informed the court through written submissions that there was mutual agreement that Mr. Restis had invested £10 million in Ms. Staveley’s business endeavors in 2008. He noted that there was evident ambiguity regarding whether this transaction constituted a loan or another type of investment.
Initially, Mr. Restis issued a statutory demand in May 2023, seeking a total of £36.8 million, comprising the outstanding loan amount of £3.4 million and what was described as “exorbitant” interest of £31.3 million, as stated by Mr. Loveday. Subsequently, Mr. Restis’ legal representatives withdrew their claims for the interest and legal costs, opting to pursue only the remaining balance of the loan.
Mr. Loveday stated that in May 2016, the parties agreed to resolve disputes through arbitration, with Ms. Staveley not assuming personal liability and her company, PCP Capital Partners, being responsible for payment. However, he claimed that Ms. Staveley was coerced into signing additional documents between 2017 and 2021, which gradually imposed personal liability on her and increased the debt. He argued that these documents were obtained through duress, undue influence, or misrepresentation, and that Ms. Staveley felt pressured into signing them.
Nevertheless, the judge countered that Ms. Staveley’s liability was clearly established in the documents and it was implausible to suggest she didn’t understand her obligations. He dismissed the notion of duress, stating that while there were commercial pressures, there was no evidence of illegitimate coercion from Mr. Restis or his legal team. The judge highlighted the amicable nature of the business relationship between Ms. Staveley and Mr. Restis, refuting any suggestion of unlawful pressure.
In her arguments, Raquel Agnello KC, representing Mr. Restis, emphasized that Ms. Staveley had been given ample time to review and revise the documents before signing them. She highlighted the lack of substance in the allegations of unlawful conduct, describing them as inherently implausible.
Additionally, the judge noted that Ms. Staveley, whom he described as a savvy businesswoman, failed to demonstrate that her judgment was unduly influenced by her diagnosis of Huntington’s disease when signing the documents.
The judge dismissed the claims, including those of being subjected to duress, as “unsustainable” and lacking credibility.
Ms. Staveley, who led a Saudi-backed consortium in the takeover of Newcastle United in 2021, was not present in court on Monday.
In response to the ruling, a spokesperson for Ms. Staveley stated: “Amanda Staveley acknowledges the High Court’s decision today regarding her application to dismiss a statutory demand brought by Victor Restis. Ms. Staveley acknowledges and appreciates the reduction of the claim by £33 million to the principal amount only, without interest. However, Ms. Staveley maintains her disagreement with personal liability and plans to file an appeal.”
Leave a Reply