header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
11 January 2007 / Victoria Von Wachter
Issue: 7255 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

'Unfair' City bonuses

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Victoria von Wachter explains how Keen restricts the scope of possible challenge to discretionary bonus decisions

 City traders and bankers are well known for having to carry their remuneration home in a wheelbarrow. In many cases a significant part of this remuneration takes the form of bonuses which depend on the ability of Gordon Gekko figures to deal with the hype, hunches and predictions of the
future. Huge amounts can be gained and lost on intuition, and rewards are commensurate with performance.

In Keen v Commerzbank AG [2006] EWCA Civ 1536, [2006] All ER (D) 239 (Nov) the Court of Appeal considered the contractual position with respect to the award of bonuses. The case concerned a city trader for the investment banking division of the defendant bank.

Background

James Keen earned a base salary plus the facility for megabucks from bonuses. The canny bank had framed the contract such that its award was discretionary:

“The decision as to whether or not to award a bonus, the amount of any award and the timing

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: When post-breach events rewrite damages claims
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
NLJ this week: Supreme Court redraws unfair prejudice rules
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
NLJ this week: ‘Joe Donor’ ruling exposes dangers of unregulated conception
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
NLJ this week: CILEX warns Mazur ruling must spark reform
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Conditional job offers carry hidden risks for employers
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll