The FSA refused the application by Gale Financial to vary Part IV permission to include the regulated activity of making arrangements with a view to regulated mortgage contracts, as they had not satisfied the threshold conditions in relation to being a ‘fit and proper person’.
|
The FSA decided that Eurodis had contravened the continuing obligations rule and were in breach of the Listing Rule 9.2 as they had failed to announce ‘without delay’ a material change in their financial condition.
|
The Court was entitled to draw adverse inferences from a party's decision not to give or call evidence as to matter within the knowledge of the witness or his employees. The weight would vary in each case. Where the witness had been the directing mind of a group and his control of the group had been gravely criticised, a decision not to testify was a strong indication that the witness had no satisfactory answer to what had been alleged judged by different standards.
|
The test for liability for dishonest assistance in Royal Brunei Airlines v Tan had not been altered by Twinsectra. It requires a dishonest state of mind on the part of the person who assists in a breach of trust. Such a state of mind may consist in knowledge that the transaction is one in which he cannot honestly participate or in suspicion combined with a conscious decision not to make inquiries which might result in knowledge. Although a dishonest state of mind is a subjective mental state, th ...
|
Although the Tribunal was enjoined to consider whether to publicise its decision arising out of an unchallenged reference from the Authority’s decision, it would generally be in the public interest to publish such a decision.
|
Third Party Rights: The tribunal considered the rights of a third party in a market abuse case under s. 393 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 and the application of rule 13 of the Financial Services and Markets Tribunal Rules 2001.
|
Procedure: Time would be extended for filing a reference notice where there would be no prejudice to the Authority but prejudice to the applicant. Where the applicant had been convicted of crimes of dishonesty the Suspension Notice should remain in effect pending the outcome of the reference.
|
Authorisation: The HSF2 Form questions relating to disclosure of spent convictions and bankruptcy were clear and unambiguous. It was not for the Applicant to decide what matters he should disclose to the Authority. Rather he must answer the questions accurately and leave the decision of relevance to the Authority. Matters arising a considerable time ago were relevant where there was a sufficiently close similarity between the nature of the applicant’s business activities relating to th ...
|
Penalties and Costs: A private warning is an inappropriate sanction where the issues are in the public domain and there had been significant and several breaches of rules. Public censure whilst itself a significant penalty is not appropriate where the breaches are serious. A fine was the only appropriate penalty. Adverse publicity generated during the course of public tribunal proceedings should not be taken into account as a mitigating factor in considering the amount of damages to b ...
|
An applicant who conceals information from the FSA and does not when challenged offer a full and candid explanation and apology may well be deemed at risk of not complying with Principle 11.
|
| 1 |