Financial Conduct Authority v Konstantinos Papadimitrakopoulos & Anor.

Financial Conduct Authority v Konstantinos Papadimitrakopoulos & Anor.

The FCA’s conduct in using MLA Material without consent amounted to an abuse of process deserving of disapproval. The First and Second Defendants were entitled to their costs of the application, but the circumstances did not justify indemnity costs. The First Defendant’s costs will be subject to detailed assessment, and the Second Defendant’s costs are summarily assessed.

Parties
Claimant: The Financial Conduct Authority; First Defendant: Konstantinos Papadimitrakopoulos; Second Defendant: Dimitris Gryparis
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 November 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil / Consequentials Hearing on Costs After Strike Out Application
Outcome
Application for costs by First and Second Defendants granted; indemnity costs refused.
Legal Topics
Costs, Abuse of Process, Mutual Legal Assistance, Collateral Use of Evidence
Civil Procedure International Cooperation Market Abuse Costs Abuse of Process Mutual Legal Assistance Collateral Use of Evidence

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Financial Conduct Authority

Claimant

Konstantinos Papadimitrakopoulos

First Defendant

Dimitris Gryparis

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Consequentials Hearing on Costs After Strike Out Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the FCA should pay the costs of the application after findings of impermissible collateral use of MLA Material
  2. 2 Whether costs should be awarded on the indemnity basis
  3. 3 Whether the Second Defendant should recover his costs

Ratio Decidendi

The FCA’s conduct in using MLA Material without consent amounted to an abuse of process deserving of disapproval. The First and Second Defendants were entitled to their costs of the application, but the circumstances did not justify indemnity costs. The First Defendant’s costs will be subject to detailed assessment, and the Second Defendant’s costs are summarily assessed.

Court Disposition

Application for costs by First and Second Defendants granted; indemnity costs refused.

Orders

  • FCA to pay the First Defendant’s costs of the application, subject to detailed assessment.
  • FCA to pay the Second Defendant’s costs of the application, summarily assessed at £70,000, payable within 14 days.