LONDON (Reuters) – Canada’s Barrick Gold must pay British dealmaker Ian Hannam’s firm $2 million plus expenses for his work on the acquisition of gold miner Randgold Resources, London’s High Court ruled on Wednesday.
Hannam was formerly one of JPMorgan’s top rainmakers and nicknamed the “king of mining” for his record of brokering deals in the resources sector, including the merger that created BHP Billiton in 2001 and the 2012 merger of Glencore and Xstrata.
His advisory boutique Hannam & Partners sued over an agreement he says was reached shortly before Barrick’s 2018 acquisition of Randgold.
Hannam & Partners said it was promised a minimum of $10 million, with the figure to increase if the deal was worth more than $10 billion.
After Barrick and Randgold agreed a deal ultimately worth some $18 billion, Hannam asked for $18 million and was rebuffed.
Randgold’s lawyers said there was no written evidence of the alleged agreement and that Hannam & Partners was not due any payment.
Judge Simon Gleeson said in a written ruling that “no contract to provide investment advisory services was ever made”.
But he added: “The claimant’s (Hannam & Partners’) early work in promoting the transaction conferred a valuable benefit on both Randgold and Barrick.
“Both Randgold and Barrick recognised this, and intended to make some payment to the claimant in respect of the value which they felt that they had received. They estimated this as being an amount of $2 million.”
Gleeson said that Hannam & Partners was therefore entitled to $2 million plus its expenses.
Hannam & Partners’ CEO Neil Passmore said the decision was “a seminal judgment for the investment banking industry with a substantial award of fees for work undertaken on a handshake, despite the fact there was no written contract”.
Barrick also claimed the ruling as a victory, saying Hannam & Partners had been awarded “the amount Randgold proposed to pay (Hannam & Partners) in September 2018 for its limited involvement in the transaction”.
(Reporting by Sam Tobin; Editing by Mark Potter)
Comments