Man Group Faces $155 Million Liability in Kuwaiti Bribery Ruling

A London judge has ruled that Man Group Plc could pay roughly $155 million after finding it liable in a bribery scheme that drained $1 billion from Kuwait's state-run pension fund over decades. The judgment, handed down Thursday by Judge Richard Jacobs, ends the longest English civil trial in more than twenty years — and the world's largest listed hedge fund group is already signaling a fight.

Man Group shares fell as much as 5.9% in London trading on Friday, the stock's steepest drop since April 23. A further hearing in November will determine the final amount the firm must pay, and the $155 million figure will likely shift because other defendants settled during the trial.

What did the judge actually decide?

Judge Jacobs found two Man Group subsidiaries liable, alongside the estate of Fahad al Rajaan, the deceased former director general of Kuwait's Public Institution for Social Security (PIFSS). The court concluded that two former Man employees knew an intermediary was bribing al Rajaan.

At the start of an 800-page ruling, Jacobs wrote: "This case involves proven corruption on a breathtaking scale, involving many individuals who had reached senior positions in public office or the financial services industries of fund management and banking."

Kuwait's Public Institution for Social Security alleged that al Rajaan plundered the fund for years, extracting hundreds of millions of dollars in illicit payments from financial firms seeking its business. Man Group was among dozens of defendants in the sprawling London lawsuit.

Man Group disputes the finding. "While we disagree with the decision, this is a legacy matter relating to a terminated contract entered into over 30 years ago," a spokesperson said in an emailed statement. "This matter is not reflective of our business then, or now." The company says it has the right to appeal and is "evaluating its full range of options."

For scale: $1 billion siphoned from a state pension fund is money that ultimately belonged to Kuwaiti public-sector workers, not just a line item in a courtroom ledger.

Who was Fahad al Rajaan?

Al Rajaan ran PIFSS from 1984 to 2012, when Kuwait suspended him over corruption concerns. His assets were frozen, and Interpol issued an arrest request following criminal complaints into his tenure. A Kuwaiti court convicted him of corruption and embezzlement charges in 2016. He died in London in 2022.

The secret commissions funded a conspicuous lifestyle: a villa in Thailand, a £6.7 million ($9 million) house in Knightsbridge, and two chalets in France. "He appeared to live a luxurious lifestyle, well beyond the reach of the salary that he was paid as director general," Jacobs said.

How deep did it reach inside Man Group?

The year-long trial heard evidence from three of the firm's most senior figures: current CEO Robyn Grew, former Middle East head Antoine Massad, and former chairman Lord Stanley Fink.

Grew testified because she was the firm's global head of compliance when Man Group launched an internal review into its relationship with one of al Rajaan's key fixers. The judge criticized the compliance officers she supervised for exhibiting confirmation bias. That review cleared everyone of wrongdoing and allowed the relationship with al Rajaan's intermediary to continue. The judge did not directly criticize Grew's own role.

Fink testified in support of Massad's character, calling him unlikely to participate in a bribery scheme. The judge rejected that account. He found Massad had knowingly participated in the bribery and held him personally liable for $155 million, though the exact payment remains undetermined.

"I do not accept that his integrity was as complete as Man's evidence sought to suggest," Jacobs wrote of Massad. The judge added there is "cogent evidence" that Massad and another Man employee "were aware that bribes were being paid to Mr. al Rajaan."

What comes next?

The November hearing will fix the damages. Man Group's statement frames the episode as ancient history, but the judgment places awareness of bribery inside two of its subsidiaries and rejected the testimony of its own former Middle East head. Whether the firm appeals — and whether the $155 million figure survives the arithmetic of prior settlements — will define the financial fallout by year-end.