Lancer fights to maintain full defence to ‘false’ claims

Moves by the Abu Dhabi royal family to strike out part of Lancer Property Asset Management’s defence to a lawsuit worth tens of millions of pounds are an attempt to suppress evidence that shows the claims brought are “false”, a lawyer for Lancer has told the High Court. David Wolfson QC, representing Lancer and its directors, told judge Mr Justice Roth that Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan, emir of Abu Dhabi and president of the United Arab Emirates, had full knowledge and gave his approval to an arrangement of payments that has given rise to the current claims of fraud and dishonesty being brought against his clients. However, he said that Sheikh Khalifa had suffered a stroke in 2014 and that there had been a transfer of power in relation to the companies that own a £5bn portfolio of central London properties – including the Berkeley Square estate – that are ultimately beneficially owned by Sheikh Khalifa. This, he said, formed the context of the current application before the court to strike out part of Lancer’s defence to the action. The companies bringing the claims accuse Lancer, which was fired as manager of the estate in 2017 after 16 years of service, of dishonesty and fraud, alleging that there was a “dishonest arrangement” between Lancer and engineer Dr Mubarak Saad Al Ahbabi, who was the chairman of Sheikh Khalifa’s private office, the Department of the President’s Affairs, and was, until 2015, the claimants’ representative in relation to the properties. It is said that the purpose of this arrangement was to “siphon off” £32m in payments to Al Ahbabi. Wolfson argued that the claimants were applying to strike out reference in his clients’ defence to statements made to them and their representatives at a mediation between the parties in 2012. In so doing, he said that the claimants were seeking to “suppress” evidence that shows that their pleaded claim – to the effect that they only discovered certain key facts in relation to the payments in 2017 – is “demonstrably false”. Wolfson said: “The pleaded claim is untrue on the basis of what we told them in the mediation papers. Those who attended the mediation will know that it is untrue. The fact is those statements which lie at the heart of the claimants’ case are untrue.” In written arguments before the court, Wolfson alleged that Sheikh Khalifa suffered a stroke in January 2014 which his clients believe “was gravely debilitating of his mental faculties”. He added that the defendants rely on a witness statement from Sheikh Sultan, the eldest son of Sheikh Khalifa, which confirms “the knowledge and approval of Sheikh Khalifa that Dr Al Ahbabi was receiving payments through Becker” – despite the fact that the claimants have produced a second witness statement from Sheikh Sultan in which his evidence has changed. He continued: “The defendants will ask the trial judge to accept the evidence in his first witness statement, and to infer that his second witness statement was not accurate and procured from him by pressure exerted by those now in control of the claimants.” At an earlier hearing, David Quest QC said that the allegations about Sheikh Khalifa’s state of health were not accepted by the claimants. Today, he denied the allegations about his clients’ motivations for making this application. Quest said: “It is said that the purpose of this application is to suppress the evidence so that we can run a deliberately false case. The point I wish to make is that we do not accept that premise. We do not accept that the without prejudice material would falsify the case or that we are trying to use the privilege in order to put forward a false case.” The case will go to trial after 1 May 2021, with a length of 18 days. The hearing continues today (Wednesday). To send feedback, e-mail jess.harrold@egi.co.uk or tweet @estatesgazette Photo: Andrew Parsons/Shutterstock