![\"Retail](\"https:\/\/dmsretail.com\/RetailNews\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/RETAIL-ONLINE-TRAINING-728-X-90.png\")
<\/a><\/p>![\"Lush\"](\"https:\/\/www.retailgazette.co.uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/2000x1365-696x464.jpg\" "\\"Lush\\"\/")
<\/div>\nLush has settled a legal dispute with its former chief executive Andrew Gerrie over a blocked transfer of shares.<\/p>\n
The bath bomb specialist found itself in a row last year with Gerrie\u2019s investment firm Silverwood Brands after the business sought to acquire a 19.8% stake \u2013 worth \u00a3216.8m \u2013 in Lush from the former boss and his wife, Alison Hawksley.<\/p>\n
The retailer blocked the transfer of shares to Silverwood as it said they did not match those previously offered to the remaining shareholders.<\/p>\n
Subscribe to Retail Gazette for free<\/strong><\/h5>\nSign up\u00a0here\u00a0to g<\/span>et the latest news straight into your inbox each morning<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\nLush claimed \u201cthe separation of legal and beneficial interests in the shares is not permissible\u201d and that the price paid for the shares was required to be made in cash, whereas Silverwood\u2019s payment was allegedly not.<\/p>\n
The retailer told The Times it had settled its legal battle as \u201cGerrie and Silverwood Brands have now accepted Lush\u2019s position that the transaction was not in compliance with the company\u2019s articles and the sale is not now proceeding\u201d.<\/p>\n
VSA Capital Group, the broker that held the shares during the dispute, said it had returned them to Gerrie and had agreed to co-operate with his and Hawksley\u2019s objective of achieving an \u201cunwind transaction\u201d.<\/p>\n
As part of the settlement, Gerrie and Hawksley will pay Silverwood \u00a3300,000 in cash for legal costs incurred.<\/p>\n
Click here to sign up to Retail Gazette\u2018s free daily email newsletter<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n
Lush claimed \u201cthe separation of legal and beneficial interests in the shares is not permissible\u201d and that the price paid for the shares was required to be made in cash, whereas Silverwood\u2019s payment was allegedly not.<\/p>\n
The retailer told The Times it had settled its legal battle as \u201cGerrie and Silverwood Brands have now accepted Lush\u2019s position that the transaction was not in compliance with the company\u2019s articles and the sale is not now proceeding\u201d.<\/p>\n
VSA Capital Group, the broker that held the shares during the dispute, said it had returned them to Gerrie and had agreed to co-operate with his and Hawksley\u2019s objective of achieving an \u201cunwind transaction\u201d.<\/p>\n
As part of the settlement, Gerrie and Hawksley will pay Silverwood \u00a3300,000 in cash for legal costs incurred.<\/p>\n
Click here to sign up to Retail Gazette\u2018s free daily email newsletter<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n