Fleurose v Securities & Futures Authority Ltd. & Anor [2001] EWCA Civ 2015 (21st December, 2001)

Fleurose v Securities & Futures Authority Ltd. & Anor [2001] EWCA Civ 2015 (21st December, 2001)

The disciplinary proceedings against Mr Fleurose did not constitute the determination of a criminal charge under Article 6 ECHR, but did involve his civil rights. The requirements of a fair trial were met: the charges were sufficiently clear, the applicant had adequate opportunity to defend himself, and the admission of evidence was not unfair. The appeal was dismissed as there was no breach of Article 6 or unfairness in the proceedings.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 2015
Parties
Appellant: Bertrand Fleurose; 1st Respondent: The Securities & Futures Authority Ltd.; 2nd Respondent: The Disciplinary Appeal Tribunal of the Securities & Futures Authority Ltd.
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (appeal) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court (morison J)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Market Manipulation, Disciplinary Proceedings, Article 6 ECHR (right to Fair Trial), Judicial Review, Professional Misconduct
Financial Regulation Administrative Law Human Rights Market Manipulation Disciplinary Proceedings Article 6 ECHR (right to Fair Trial) Judicial Review Professional Misconduct

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 3 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bertrand Fleurose

Appellant

The Securities & Futures Authority Ltd.

1st Respondent

The Disciplinary Appeal Tribunal of the Securities & Futures Authority Ltd.

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (appeal) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court (morison J)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether disciplinary proceedings before the SFA constituted the determination of a 'criminal charge' under Article 6 ECHR
  2. 2 Whether the disciplinary proceedings infringed the right to a fair trial under Article 6 ECHR
  3. 3 Whether the charges were too vague to be fair

Ratio Decidendi

The disciplinary proceedings against Mr Fleurose did not constitute the determination of a criminal charge under Article 6 ECHR, but did involve his civil rights. The requirements of a fair trial were met: the charges were sufficiently clear, the applicant had adequate opportunity to defend himself, and the admission of evidence was not unfair. The appeal was dismissed as there was no breach of Article 6 or unfairness in the proceedings.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Appellant to pay £25,000 in costs