Baker Tilly UK Audit LLP & Ors v Financial Reporting Council & Ors

Paragraph 12(1)(f) of the Guidance refers to misconduct as defined in the Accountancy Scheme, meaning a significant departure from professional standards. The Guidance is not unlawful or flawed as alleged, and the Executive Counsel lawfully applied the correct test in deciding to deliver a Formal Complaint. The appeal is dismissed.

Parties: Appellants: Baker Tilly UK Audit LLP and Ors; Respondents: Financial Reporting Council and Ors
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 07 June 2017
Procedural Posture: Judicial Review Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome: Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics: Interpretation of Disciplinary Guidance, Definition of Misconduct, Public Interest Test in Disciplinary Proceedings

Administrative Law Professional Discipline Interpretation of Disciplinary Guidance Definition of Misconduct Public Interest Test in Disciplinary Proceedings

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 4 Party arguments 2

Parties

Baker Tilly UK Audit LLP and Ors

Appellants

Financial Reporting Council and Ors

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Whether paragraph 12(1)(f) of the FRC Guidance is lawful and properly interpreted
2 Whether the Guidance requires more or less than 'misconduct' as defined in the Accountancy Scheme
3 Whether the Executive Counsel's decision to deliver a Formal Complaint was lawful

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

Appeal dismissed; no quashing of Guidance or decision; no declaration of unlawfulness