The applicant sought to delay disciplinary proceedings by the accountancy body pending the outcome of civil litigation over a related matter.
Held: ‘ . . as Parliament has entrusted the initial valuation of the case against the applicants to the respondent, and has built into the disciplinary scheme adequate procedural protections for the applicants, we believe that absent quite exceptional circumstances such as those listed by Steyn LJ (in Fayed) . . we should not get involved in a detailed consideration of the merits, but accept the respondent’s valuation that there is a strong public interest in the continuance of this enquiry (which could lead to disciplinary proceedings) not being delayed by order of the court.’
Citations:
[1995] BCC 1
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Institute of Chartered Accounts and Others, Ex Parte Brindle and Others CA 12-Jan-1994
The Bank’s liquidator action was to be concluded before a disciplinary enquiry, and the enquiry should be stayed accordingly. . .
Cited – Regina v Panel on Take-overs and Mergers, ex parte Fayed CA 1992
This was a renewed application for leave to apply for judicial review of decisions of the Panel not to adjourn its disciplinary proceedings against Mr Fayed. . .
Cited by:
Cited – Land and others v the Executive Counsel of the Joint Disciplinary Scheme QBD 15-Oct-2002
The applicants were partners and staff in Ernst and Young. They sought a stay of disciplinary proceedings brought against them by the accountancy regulators pending resolution of the civil claim against them in respect of closely related issues . .
Cited – Regina v Executive Counsel of the JDS, ex parte Hipps ChD 1996
The court considered the law as to whether disciplinary procedings should be stayed pending the outcome of civil proceedings.
Held: The court was not reviewing the decision not to adjourn the proceedings, but exercising an original . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Litigation Practice
Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.198150