logo
Paddy McKillen's billion-pound legal battle over Claridge's hotel reaches ‘high noon'

Paddy McKillen's billion-pound legal battle over Claridge's hotel reaches ‘high noon'

Irish Times17-05-2025

A three-person arbitration panel convened privately in London this week to try to resolve a dispute over Claridge's hotel that forms the centrepiece of one of the most acrimonious, and potentially lucrative, legal battles of the past decade.
On one side is
Paddy McKillen
, the wealthy Irish property developer who owns a whiskey distillery with U2 star Bono. On the other, Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim bin Jaber al-Thani, the billionaire former prime minister of
Qatar
known as HBJ.
McKillen claims he is owed up to £1 billion (€1.2 billion) for his work at three of the world's most glamorous hotels – Claridge's, the Connaught and the Berkeley – all located in rarefied central London postcodes.
McKillen, 70, and HBJ, 66, were once close allies, spending time together on yachts and in swanky hotels. But this week's arbitration is unfolding amid a bitter legal battle, spanning at least a dozen claims and disputes in Europe and the US, between the former friends and their associates.
READ MORE
Three arbitrators – one chosen by each side, and a third chosen by the other two, according to those familiar with the terms – will now decide who emerges claiming victory.
[
Irish businessman Paddy McKillen claims he is victim of 'smear campaign' by Qatari royal family
Opens in new window
]
While sources said it may take as long as two months for a decision to be reached, a resolution to a dispute that began three years ago may now be in sight.
'It's high noon,' said one person close to the process.
Claridge's – the 169-year-old luxury Mayfair hotel that was a favourite of Queen Elizabeth II – is the crown jewel in a multibillion-pound portfolio of high end London properties owned by Qatar and wealthy members of its ruling family.
Belfast-born McKillen, who went into property in the 1980s after a stint working in his family's exhaust repair business, first invested in Claridge's in 2004.
His investment came under threat in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, when the Barclay brothers tried to seize control of Claridge's, the Connaught and the Berkeley, now known collectively as the
Maybourne Hotel Group
.
McKillen secured Qatari backing to help resolve his legal battle with the Barclays, former owners of the Telegraph newspaper. The 2015 rescue saw HBJ and the former Qatari emir, Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani (HBK), take full control of Maybourne in a £1.3 billion deal that resolved McKillen's legal case, wiped out his debts and reduced his equity in the hotels to zero.
The Qataris subsequently agreed to an unconventional deal that McKillen hoped would allow him to share in the future upside of the hotels. Under the terms of the seven-year contract, McKillen's business,
Hume Street Management Consultants
(HSMC), would refurbish, manage and extend the hotels. The deal granted McKillen 36 per cent of any subsequent increase in valuation across the three hotels, minus the costs of the work.
But his involvement in the hotels – due to end in December 2022 – was cut short in April of that year, when McKillen was unexpectedly told by the Qataris he would no longer be working for them.
The size of McKillen's unpaid earnings from this arrangement sit at the heart of the dispute playing out this week in London.
McKillen argues that the extensive refurbishment work at Claridge's – which included adding an opulent underground spa and a £60,000-per-night penthouse suite, replete with 75 Damien Hirst artworks – has helped substantially boost Claridge's value.
The developer argues that those improvements, allied to a buoyant luxury hotel market post-Covid, means his payout should be in the hundreds of millions.
However, sources close to the Qataris claim the significant costs of work at the hotels means McKillen is owed substantially less than he claims. Even so, those close to the Qataris acknowledge McKillen is still owed something.
One person with knowledge of the dispute said that given the baseline value of £1.3 billion, and about £600 million-£700 million in costs, any valuation above £2 billion would mean McKillen is entitled to 36 per cent of the upside thereafter. Estimates being talked about by advisers have varied between less than £3 billion to over £5 billion, according to one person with knowledge of the situation, which would equate to a payout of more than £1 billion at the top end.
There have been attempts at mediation, according to one person with knowledge of the situation, with the most recent taking place in autumn 2023, after McKillen withdrew an attempt to extend the claim over a number of newer luxury hotels in the US and France, leaving the focus on the original three sites in London that had been the portfolio over the seven-year period.
In the meantime, the two sides appear to have been waging commercial lawfare. Claims and counterclaims have been filed across multiple countries, relating to developments owned by HBJ, or his associates and companies connected with them, on which McKillen claims refurbishment or development work.
People familiar with the Qataris' position claim McKillen thought he could 'embarrass' them into striking a deal by filing lawsuits that generated headlines and scrutiny of the complex ownership structures that often lie behind property acquisitions. They point to some of the victories secured so far in courts over McKillen.
McKillen's side argues the Qataris have been equally aggressive in their attempts to get him to back down from the Claridge's dispute.
Representatives for McKillen and the Qatari owners of Claridge's declined to comment on the confidential arbitration process.
In a statement, a spokesperson for McKillen said: 'It is right that he has taken, and will continue to take, all necessary steps to enforce his rights. As Mr McKillen has made clear over the four-year period since his departure from the Maybourne Hotel Group, he will not be deterred by any attempted campaign to cause damage to his business interests or smear his reputation.'
The Financial Times has identified a dozen legal clashes between the two sides – mainly in the UK, France or the US – often seeking money for work that McKillen and his companies say has been carried out for the Qataris and associated groups. Work for which McKillen claims he has not been paid.
Other cases have been started by the Qataris, which claim McKillen used Maybourne contractors, paid for by Maybourne, to undertake work at his hotel in France last July. McKillen denies the allegations.
The cases involve luxury properties, including hotels on the French Riviera and in Paris and Bel-Air, California, and homes in Manhattan and London. McKillen is claiming tens of millions of pounds of unpaid fees.
In March, a high court judge in the UK prevented McKillen's HSMC from serving a £3.7 million claim outside England, in a dispute over fees for work at Forbes House, a grade II listed mansion in Belgravia, bought by HBJ in 2016.
HSMC has appealed against the ruling and is seeking renewed permission to serve proceedings. McKillen has started new proceedings in his own name.
Separately, McKillen was convicted this year of verbally assaulting a female bailiff in his apartment on the Place Vendôme, a grand public square in Paris. The bailiff had entered his property with a locksmith in a dispute over mortgage repayments to a Qatar-owned private wealth manager.
McKillen is appealing against the decision. He denies any violence or wrongdoing, has filed an ethics complaint before the Paris disciplinary chamber of bailiffs, and his lawyers have in the past described the case as 'part of a more general smear campaign' against him.
Most recently, in April, McKillen filed a lawsuit in a California district court alleging that HBK and HBJ, as well as several of their business associates and related companies, sought to defraud him.
He alleges they did not pay for his firm's work at a number of properties which are already the focus of other cases, using the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. Qatar has denied the claims.
'Paddy McKillen and associated parties have orchestrated claims across multiple jurisdictions, all of which are either ongoing or have been struck out by the courts. We will continue to contest these claims and prove the assertions and allegations to be unsubstantiated and entirely false,' said a spokesperson for Maybourne.
The latest case under the RICO act adds to a long and costly list of lawsuits. However, the hundreds of millions of pounds at stake in the Claridge's arbitration is the real prize for both sides.
The sight of expensive tabs being quietly settled is a familiar one in the hotel's luxurious bars and restaurants. With the panel of arbitration in London totting up how much the Qataris owe McKillen, the owners of Claridge's will soon find out just how large their own bill will be. – Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2025

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Nine-figure payouts to Ryanair and Starbucks CEOs are controversial, but Michael O'Leary can point to results
Nine-figure payouts to Ryanair and Starbucks CEOs are controversial, but Michael O'Leary can point to results

Irish Times

timean hour ago

  • Irish Times

Nine-figure payouts to Ryanair and Starbucks CEOs are controversial, but Michael O'Leary can point to results

Michael O'Leary has hit his target. Ryanair 's share price stayed above €21 for 28 days, earning him a €125 million bonus if he stays until 2028. The deal has its critics. 'Morally questionable,' said Luke Hildyard of the High Pay Centre, a UK think tank. Others argue such payouts reward luck more than leadership, with cheap oil, index inclusion and billions in share buybacks all helping lift Ryanair's stock. O'Leary might counter that Ryanair shares have more than doubled since the deal was struck in 2019, comfortably outperforming rival airlines. Contrast that with Starbucks , where Brian Niccol was handed a reported $113 million sign-on package last August to replace embattled CEO Laxman Narasimhan. Shares soared 25 per cent on the news, adding $21 billion in market value. READ MORE [ Corporate tax receipts drop 30% as Trump's tariffs bite Opens in new window ] Since then, Starbucks has slashed head office jobs, trimmed menus and promised a return to its coffeehouse roots. But the results remain bitter. Margins and profits are down. Competition remains fierce in China. The stock tanked after last month's earnings miss and has now given up almost all of its Niccol bump. Niccol may yet prove his worth – his turnaround of Chipotle is textbook stuff – but the caffeine hit investors got from his arrival has faded fast. O'Leary, never one to miss a jab, might well look at Starbucks and say: at least I had to do something to get my millions.

FD Technologies chairwoman urges investors to back takeover
FD Technologies chairwoman urges investors to back takeover

Irish Times

timean hour ago

  • Irish Times

FD Technologies chairwoman urges investors to back takeover

FD Technologies chair Donna Troy has urged investors to back a £541.6 million (€643.04 million) sale of the Newry-based data and analytics company to US private equity firm TA Associates at a special meeting on June 30th, saying there are risks to it delivering on its full potential as a standalone public company. The company's remaining business, KX, which analyses large data sets in real time to help companies predict and respond to market conditions across the various business areas, may be hampered by 'uncertain public markets' if it needs to accelerate investment to capture opportunities in artificial intelligence (AI). 'Furthermore, FD Technologies is a relatively small player in a large, but fast-moving, fragmented market,' Ms Troy said in a letter to shareholders, contained in documents relating to the planned deal, published on the company's website on Friday. 'Competing with a number of larger, very well capitalised software providers and consequently the FD Technologies, directors are cautiously aware of execution risk to delivering its strategy and the associated value to FD Technologies shareholders.' READ MORE The deal with TA Associates, first announced a month ago, follows a big restructuring at the Dublin-listed company last year. This led to the group selling its former core First Derivatives division to US software group EPAM in a £236.1 million transaction and the spin-off of another business, called MRP , into a merger. It subsequently returned £120 million to shareholders in January through a stock buyback deal. How to manage your pension in these volatile times Listen | 37:00 FD Technologies confirmed that it has secured irrevocable commitments from shareholders behind 56.7 per cent of its stock for the TA Associates deal. It will need approval from holders of 75 per cent of its shares to get the transaction over the line through the mechanism, known as a scheme of arrangement, that TA Associates is using to execute the takeover. Shareholders are being offered the choice of taking cash for their stock or rolling their shares into the bid vehicle. 'The FD Technologies board does not give any recommendation to FD Technologies shareholders as to whether they should elect for the alternative offer [of taking shares in the bid vehicle],' the company said. 'FD Technologies shareholders should determine whether acquiring or holding rollover shares is affected by the laws or regulations of the relevant jurisdiction in which they reside and consider the advantages and disadvantages of electing for the alternative offer, and whether rollover shares are a suitable investment in light of their own personal circumstance.'

LIV Golf shows what happens when a niche sport goes to war with itself – rugby should take note
LIV Golf shows what happens when a niche sport goes to war with itself – rugby should take note

Irish Times

timean hour ago

  • Irish Times

LIV Golf shows what happens when a niche sport goes to war with itself – rugby should take note

This R360 stuff is interesting for the thunder that isn't rolling. Normally, when you come across a sport being sized up for attack by an outside disrupter, you can't move for sirens wailing and cannons firing in opposition. That doesn't quite seem to be the case with rugby in this instance, which raises the fascinating question of why that might be. It feels like a little more than just the usual rugby confidence in itself, although that is certainly part of it. World Rugby hasn't said anything about the proposed breakaway league spearheaded by former England international Mike Tindall. There hasn't been a peep out of any of the unions. None of the players' bodies have chirped up, either in support or in high dudgeon. Since nothing is yet official and all anybody has to go on is a strategically leaked business pitch and a year-old podcast rumination by Tindall, it's maybe no surprise that everyone is holding fire for now. But somewhere in the silence lies the uncomfortable truth that has set this thing in motion in the first place. Rugby is in a precarious place right now. Nobody can say with any confidence what it's going to look like in, say, a decade's time, but it probably won't look like this. Particularly in England, where three Premiership clubs have gone to the wall in recent seasons and seven of those remaining are losing money. READ MORE England is one of the great rugby nations on the planet and it is struggling to make the sport a viable business. Same goes for Wales , where the WRU is reducing its funding to two of the four regions. Same Down Under , where Rugby Australia recently announced a loss of $36.8 million (a shade under €21 million) for 2024 – and had the chutzpah to pass it off as good news because the Lions tour and next year's World Cup will bring in the bucks. So much jam tomorrow. Into this world, the arrival of an idea that is apparently attracting new sources of funding can't be dismissed out of hand. Especially when some of the people interested are reportedly established owners from the big, sexy, moneymaking leagues – the NFL, the Premier League, Formula 1. These are the lads with a proven record of turning existing sports into spun gold. If they think they have a way of making rugby viable, there's probably more rugby people than you think who are willing to give them a hearing. Instinctively though, it feels like the whole idea has two glaring issues. One, rugby is too small for a breakaway league to work. And two, rugby players aren't famous enough to build a breakaway league around. They're both variations on the same problem, but let's take them in order and use the most recent sports league disruptor as a case study. [ 'Crampgate' tells us rugby's code of dignity counts for little when lucrative online views are at stake Opens in new window ] Bryson DeChambeau celebrates his birdie putt on the 18th hole with a record 58 to win the LIV Golf Invitational - Greenbrier at The Old White Course in August 2023 in White Sulphur Springs, West Virginia. Photograph:The first LIV Golf tournament took place this week in 2022. Since then, LIV has unquestionably gone on to establish itself as a player in the golf ecosystem. Whatever future the game has, LIV and its players will have to be dealt with, one way or the other. It's maybe no surprise that some of the people involved in R360 have worked on LIV. Plenty of commentators pooh-poohed LIV from the start and didn't envisage it lasting the course. That it's still here at all will be proof enough for some of those involved that a successful template exists and that rugby is ripe for its application. But the reality is that LIV has been a disaster for golf , simply because golf is far too niche a sport to be going to war with itself. By breaking away from the PGA Tour , LIV is running an unprofitable sports league that is bringing in pitiful broadcasting money and is only surviving because there's a bottomless well of Saudi oil cash to feed it. Rugby is played seriously in nine countries on the planet. In only two of those is it the number one sport – arguably only in one, given that football at least has parity in Wales these days. Rugby's problems stem from the fact that there are already not enough people who want to pay to watch it, be that in person or on the TV. Slicing the sausage even thinner makes it highly unlikely that more people will suddenly think it's worth shelling out for. That's especially true when you take the second lesson from the LIV disaster. LIV's signature achievement has been to slough off most of the interesting players away from the PGA Tour and hide them in a league that nobody watches. Jon Rahm , Bryson DeChambeau , Brooks Koepka , Phil Mickelson , Patrick Reed – these are (in some cases, were) some of the best players in the world and some of the most watchable. But they may as well be bog-snorkelling for their dime now, for all that anybody tunes in to see them. And yet, whatever LIV's problems, at least the idea of following individual sportspeople is already established in golf. People don't follow rugby players. They follow rugby teams. The international game is the financial engine of the sport not because Antoine Dupont plays for France and Sam Prendergast for Ireland, but because millions of people are invested in the outcome regardless of who is the blue nine and the Ireland 10. [ Craig Casey to captain Ireland for summer Tests against Georgia and Portugal Opens in new window ] [ Tiger Woods son Charlie fires 66 to clinch first career AJGA title Opens in new window ] Let's say – and this is entirely for argument's sake before anyone's lawyers get twitchy – that Dupont and Prendergast are R360 players in a couple of years' time, taking each other on in São Paulo, LA and Barcelona. Are you watching? Maybe. Do you care who wins? Not a chance. If it means that neither of them is playing for Ireland or France, will it stop you watching the Six Nations? Even less of a chance. Rugby will change in the coming years. It has to. But the R360 proposal seems to want to (a) chop an already small sport into even smaller pieces and (b) build a new entity around a group of players who are pretty much interchangeable to all but the sport's most engaged devotees. LIV Golf gets away with it because the Saudis seem comfortable emptying barrels of money into it indefinitely. Hard to imagine R360's backers aspiring to their munificence.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store