One of Revolution Beauty’s problems is over. Terms of the long-running departure saga between the firm and its former CEO Adam Minto have been agreed “amicably”. And it involves Minto paying the business he co-founded £2.9 million.

On Monday, the multi-channel mass beauty retailer told its shareholders it had entered into a “settlement agreement relating to the previously announced events that led to the delay of the audit of Revolution Beauty’s FY22 results and the suspension of trading of the Group’s shares on AIM during Adam Minto’s time as CEO”.

It comes with “no admission or acceptance of liability by either party”.

The settlement sum will be paid in six annual instalments, with the first payment of £483,333.35 due on 28 March and subsequent equal instalments of £483,333.33 due on 28 March of each calendar year up to and including 28 March 2029. If an instalment is not paid on time, then interest will be charged at 8% per annum, it noted.

The Revolution board called it “a fair settlement” for the company.

Alistair McGeorge, Non-Executive Chairman, added: “We are very pleased to have reached an agreement with Adam. This, together with the revised payment schedule agreed in December 2023 for the acquisition of Medichem, means we can now focus on the future. We look forward to providing an update on our strategy at our upcoming Capital Markets Event on 8 February”.

But not all issues surrounding Revolution Beauty have been resolved. Late last week, the firm said it’s contesting allegations made against it by a former shareholder Chrysalis Investments.

Earlier in the week, Chrysalis’ board said the company had “potential claims” for actions of “deceit, negligent misstatement and misrepresentation”.

The firm took a £40 million hit when it offloaded its stake in Revolution Beauty following an accounting probe that saw its shares suspended.

It bought Revolution shares in July 2021 for around £45 million and sold them in late 2022 for around £5.7 million in total.

Chrysalis said: “The original share purchase was made on the basis that information provided to the company by Revolution prior to the company’s purchase of the shares in Revolution, and during the period in which the shares were held prior to their sale, contained misstatements and material omission”.

However, Revolution said it “strongly contests” the allegations and has been engaging with Chrysalis’ advisers accordingly.