References: [2011] UKUT B4 (FS)
Links: Bailii
UTTC MARKET ABUSE – Conditions in FSMA s118(2) – Whether applicant an insider within s118B(e) – Yes – Whether information not generally available – Yes – Whether information of a precise nature within meaning of s118C(2) – Yes – Whether information likely to have a significant effect on price within meaning of s118C(6) – Yes – Defence under s123(2)(a) of belief on reasonable grounds that not market abuse – Defence not made out – Penalty to be imposed – Whether applicant fit and proper – No – Prohibition.

References: [2012] EWHC B4 (Mercantile)
Links: Bailii
Coram: Simon Brown QC
The claimant provided facilities for trading in financial derivatives, and had acted for the defendants. It now sought to recover substantial losses incurred on their accounts. The defendants denied that the sums were payable, on the basis that the claimant had not obtained the necessary client agreements required by the claimant’s regulator.

References: [2014] UKUT B2 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
Coram: Herrington UTJ
UTTC FINANCIAL SERVICES – Supervisory Notice – Application for direction to suspend effect of notice until reference disposed of – Notice varied Applicant’s permission by removing all regulated activities with immediate effect – Reason for notice being failure to satisfy Threshold Conditions-Respondent not satisfied that Applicant a fit and proper person because in its opinion Applicant conducting his affairs in an inappropriate matter and acted with a lack of integrity – whether Tribunal satisfied that the direction to suspend the effect of the notice would not prejudice the interests of consumers – No – Whether necessary for notice to take effect immediately-Yes – Application dismissed – Rule5(5) The Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008

References: [2014] UKUT 335 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC FINANCIAL SERVICES – whether applicant guilty of misconduct – breach of Statement of Principle 1 – dishonesty and lack of integrity – whether applicant is a fit and proper person – withdrawal of approval to carry out approved functions – FSMA, s 63 – prohibition order – s 56 – financial penalty – s 66

References: [2014] UKUT B6 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTTC FINANCIAL SERVICES – financial penalty for submitting fraudulent mortgage applications – whether conduct of applicant dishonest or recklessfound to be dishonest-whether imposition of financial penalty appropriateyes – scale of appropriate penalty – whether appropriate in the circumstances to take account of applicant’s means – yes – Authority directed to impose penalty of £80,000 – reference dismissed

References: [2014] UKUT 340 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC FINANCIAL SERVICES – procedure – application to make reference out of time – whether Tribunal satisfied that in all the circumstances application should be granted – yes – Rule 2 and Schedule 3 Paragraph 2(2) Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008

References: [2014] UKUT 175 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC PENSIONS REGULATOR – Financial support direction – procedure – whether Targets should be barred from pursuing parts of their pleaded cases on grounds that previous case management decision had created an issue estoppel – no – whether to allow issue to continue to be pleaded would be an abuse of process – no – application dismissed

References: [2013] UKUT B8 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC Financial services – prohibition order – s 56 FSMA – matter remitted to Tribunal by Court of Appeal to address the question whether, even if applicant was not guilty of market abuse, his lying, which in earlier proceedings the Tribunal had found as a fact, demonstrated that he was not a fit and proper person – whether a prohibition order was appropriate in circumstances where applicant had not worked in financial services for a considerable period and gave evidence that he did not intend to do so
Last Update: 14-Nov-15 Ref: 521028

References: [2013] UKUT 140 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC PROHIBITION ORDER – FSMA s56 -Whether applicant fit and proper

References: [2014] UKUT 214 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC FINANCIAL SERVICES – withdrawal of approval and prohibition of approved person – whether Applicant made false and misleading representations in mortgage applications – yes – whether Applicant failed to deal with the Authority in open and co-operative manner – yes – whether Applicant dishonest – no – whether Applicant lacked integrity – yes – whether Applicant fit and proper person – no – prohibition from carrying out any function confirmed – reference dismissed

References: [2015] UKUT 13 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC FINANCIAL SERVICES – investment management – management of conflicts of interest – compliance monitoring – separation of decision making within firm acting for different customers – whether property of open ended investment companies managed with the aim of providing a prudent spread of risk as regards liquidity – Principles 2, 3, 8 in respect of alleged breaches by firm and Statements of Principle 6 and 7 in respect of alleged breaches by individual Applicants
Management of conflicts of interest in respect of four specific transactions – whether Applicants acted without integrity – Principle 1 in respect of alleged breaches by firm and Statement of Principle 1 in respect of alleged breaches by individual Applicants Financial penalty and public censure – whether action against individual Applicants prevented by limitation – s66(4), (5) FSMA – appropriate level of penalty – ss66(3), 205 FSMA
Fitness and properness of individuals – withdrawal of approvals – prohibition orders – ss56 and 63 FSMA

References: [2013] UKUT B2 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC MARKET ABUSE – share price manipulation – whether demonstrate- yes – FSMA s 118 – whether entering into contracts for difference knowing counterparty would hedge by placing orders for stocks amounts to behaviour ‘in relation to’ qualifying investments – yes- whether open to FSA to take action against dissolved Canadian corporation regulated in Canada and with no place of business in United Kingdom – yes- scale of penalty- reference dismissed.
Statutes: Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 118