Peskin's contract under fire
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.OUTRAGED shareholders are this week expected to question the board of Great Portland Estates, one of Britain's largest property companies, about the controversial management contract with its chairman and chief executive, Richard Peskin, which can only be terminated on 57 months' notice, writes David Hellier.
The directors are expected to signal their intention to modify the contract at the company's annual general meeting in London on Tuesday.
The company has a 10-year- old agreement with Basil and Howard Samuel, a management agent company owned by Mr Peskin. Some institutional shareholders have complained about the notice period.
In the year ended 31 March 1992, fees paid to B&HS amounted to pounds 3.1m. Mr Peskin has agreed, under a later accord, to devote substantially the whole of his time and attention to Great Portland Estates.
Ahead of the meeting, a board member, who declined to be named, said the matter would be dealt with 'in a way in which every member of the board can stand up and be counted'.
'But we won't be rushing in to anything,' he added. 'It will be considered at the next board meeting, which is not scheduled until October. We don't want to appear to be running behind a campaign.'
(Photograph omitted)
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments