Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Ward 'never thought to disclose 5.2m pounds fee'

Topaz Amoore
Wednesday 03 February 1993 00:02 GMT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

THOMAS WARD, the former Guinness director accused of stealing pounds 5.2m from the company, told a court yesterday it 'never crossed his mind' to report to the main Guinness board that he received what he insists was a success fee for that amount.

He told the court at the Old Bailey that Price Waterhouse, Guinness's auditors, said there was no need for him personally to disclose the payment.

Mr Ward, 53, an American lawyer, insists the pounds 5.2m payment, made in May 1986, was a legitimate fee for advice given during Guinness's pounds 2.7bn bid for Distillers. Yesterday the jury heard that he had sought 'clarity and perfect understanding' over his fees, although he also agreed that nothing had been written down.

'That's not the way I do business,' he said. The payment was, he said, negotiated with and agreed by Ernest Saunders, the former Guinness chief executive. It was to comprise one-fifth of 1 per cent of the bid's eventual value.

'Between us we understood exactly what our agreement was . . . He looked me right in the eye and I looked him in the eye and that was the agreement, a straightforward agreement,' Mr Ward said. 'It was clear we had a meeting of minds.' The trial continues today.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in