UPDATE: Pullen and CBRE case dropped

The former UK managing director of CBRE, Matt Pullen has agreed to withdraw an employment tribunal claim against CBRE.

He was claiming constructive dismissal and sexual discrimination, following his departure from CBRE on 5 November 2012.

CBRE said it has agreed to withdraw its High Court claim against Pullen.

A CBRE spokesman said: “CBRE has made no payment to Matt Pullen or any other third party in consideration for the withdrawal by Matt Pullen of his employment tribunal claim.”

Pullen left the firm following an allegation of rape and his subsequent arrest on 31 October 2012 – just six days after his promotion from EMEA head of global corporate services to UK managing director. No charges were ever brought against Pullen.

He claimed that the publication of his name in the media has ruined his top-tier career.

Alongside seeking £21m from CBRE for loss of potential earnings, Pullen was suing CBRE’s PR adviser FTI and its corporate communications chairman Tony Danaher for an alleged breach of privacy rights . That £200,000 claim halted the employment tribunal late last year.

The CBRE spokesman added: “In respect of the legal proceedings between Matt Pullen, FTI Consulting LLP and Anthony Danaher, these parties confirm that mutually acceptable terms of settlement have been agreed between them, the detail of which they have agreed to keep confidential.”

A statement read out in the High Court this morning on behalf of Matt Pullen, said: “In November 2012 the claimant [Pullen] and CBRE entered into negotiations which led to a settlement agreement pursuant to which the claimant was to depart from CBRE. The first defendant [FTI] was retained by CBRE to advise on public relations matters and advised in connection with the claimant’s departure. The second defendant [Anthony Danaher] was the chairman of strategic communications of the first defendants who dealt with this matter on behalf of the first defendant.

“The claimant has bought a claim in privacy against the first and second defendant in respect of the disclosure of certain details concerning the circumstances of the claimant’s departure from CBRE.

“Following negotiations between the parties, the first defendant has agreed to apologise by means of this statement being made in open court. The first defendant has paid a sum to the claimant in damages and as a contribution towards his costs.”

A statement on behalf of FTI read: “On behalf of the first defendant, we accept and confirm all that our learned friend has said. On behalf of the first defendant we apologise unreservedly for the inadvertent mistake which led to the disclosing of details of the claimant’s departure from CBRE and are truly sorry for the distress and inconvenience suffered by the claimant in the circumstances.”