Key Takeaways
- • Crispin Odey dropped his £79 million libel claim against the Financial Times on April 11, 2026, after acknowledging the newspaper was "likely to succeed" in establishing a public interest defence for its reporting.
- • The FT published allegations in 2023 from 20 women detailing sexual assault and harassment spanning five decades; the newspaper disclosed it had 15 women willing to testify in court.
- • Odey's decision followed a three-week Upper Tribunal hearing challenging the Financial Conduct Authority's ban from the UK financial services industry and £1.8 million fine; during that hearing, he admitted to sexually assaulting one employee in 2005.
- • The withdrawal occurred only two months after the FT served Odey with substantial evidence disclosure intended for trial, indicating the newspaper's legal position was formidable.
- • The case represents a significant legal and reputational conclusion for the former hedge fund manager, whose firm Odey Asset Management (established 1991) announced closure plans in October 2023 following the initial allegations.
Summary
Crispin Odey, 67, former founder of Odey Asset Management, has abandoned his £79 million libel claim against the Financial Times over the newspaper's 2023 reporting of sexual misconduct allegations against him. In a letter delivered Friday afternoon, Odey's legal representatives stated he had been "forced to accept" that the FT was "likely to succeed in establishing" its public interest defence—a critical legal threshold in defamation proceedings that protects publishers reporting matters of significant public concern.
The FT's 2023 investigation documented allegations from 20 women spanning five decades, alleging sexual assault and harassment. In its legal defence, the newspaper disclosed it had secured commitments from 15 witnesses willing to testify in court. The timing of Odey's withdrawal is notable: it occurred merely two months after the FT served him with substantial evidence disclosure detailing its investigative findings—a development that appears to have materially shifted his assessment of likely trial outcomes.
Odey's strategic retreat follows an exhausting three-week hearing before the Upper Tribunal in March 2024, where he challenged the Financial Conduct Authority's December 2023 decision to ban him from the UK financial services industry and impose a £1.8 million fine. Critically, during that Upper Tribunal proceeding, Odey admitted to sexually assaulting one employee in 2005. His legal team's withdrawal letter cited fatigue from the recent trial and the considerable costs of pursuing another extended legal battle with uncertain prospects, even if he succeeded on certain narrow grounds.
Roula Khalaf, editor of the Financial Times, characterized the withdrawal as "a vindication for investigative journalism and for the victims whose stories of abuse we reported," adding that "the FT was always confident in its reporting. This is a case that should have never been brought." The case's conclusion removes uncertainty for both the newspaper and the broader institutional investment community regarding high-profile investigative reporting into financial industry conduct.
The FT's 2023 investigation documented allegations from 20 women spanning five decades, alleging sexual assault and harassment. In its legal defence, the newspaper disclosed it had secured commitments from 15 witnesses willing to testify in court. The timing of Odey's withdrawal is notable: it occurred merely two months after the FT served him with substantial evidence disclosure detailing its investigative findings—a development that appears to have materially shifted his assessment of likely trial outcomes.
Odey's strategic retreat follows an exhausting three-week hearing before the Upper Tribunal in March 2024, where he challenged the Financial Conduct Authority's December 2023 decision to ban him from the UK financial services industry and impose a £1.8 million fine. Critically, during that Upper Tribunal proceeding, Odey admitted to sexually assaulting one employee in 2005. His legal team's withdrawal letter cited fatigue from the recent trial and the considerable costs of pursuing another extended legal battle with uncertain prospects, even if he succeeded on certain narrow grounds.
Roula Khalaf, editor of the Financial Times, characterized the withdrawal as "a vindication for investigative journalism and for the victims whose stories of abuse we reported," adding that "the FT was always confident in its reporting. This is a case that should have never been brought." The case's conclusion removes uncertainty for both the newspaper and the broader institutional investment community regarding high-profile investigative reporting into financial industry conduct.
Go deeper than the headline
Research every firm in this story, track the ones that matter and get the daily briefing — free for 7 days.