ClientEarth, R (on the application of) v Financial Conduct Authority

ClientEarth, R (on the application of) v Financial Conduct Authority

The FCA's approval of Ithaca's prospectus was lawful as the requirements of Articles 6 and 16 of the Prospectus Regulation are evaluative and were rationally applied. There is no requirement for the issuer to disclose its assessment of risk materiality or specificity. The claim does not qualify as an Aarhus Convention claim as the relevant provisions do not relate to environmental law.

Parties
Claimant: ClientEarth; Defendant: Financial Conduct Authority; Interested Party: Ithaca Energy PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Renewed Application for Permission for Judicial Review
Outcome
Permission for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Prospectus Regulation, Disclosure of Climate Related Risks, Standing in Judicial Review, Aarhus Convention Claims
Administrative Law Financial Regulation Prospectus Regulation Disclosure of Climate Related Risks Standing in Judicial Review Aarhus Convention Claims

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ClientEarth

Claimant

Financial Conduct Authority

Defendant

Ithaca Energy PLC

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Renewed Application for Permission for Judicial Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the FCA erred in law by approving Ithaca's prospectus without adequate disclosure of climate-related financial risks under Article 16 of the Prospectus Regulation
  2. 2 Whether the FCA erred in law by approving the prospectus without adequate specificity of climate-related risks under Article 16
  3. 3 Whether the FCA's conclusion that the prospectus contained necessary information for investors under Article 6 was rationally sustainable

Ratio Decidendi

The FCA's approval of Ithaca's prospectus was lawful as the requirements of Articles 6 and 16 of the Prospectus Regulation are evaluative and were rationally applied. There is no requirement for the issuer to disclose its assessment of risk materiality or specificity. The claim does not qualify as an Aarhus Convention claim as the relevant provisions do not relate to environmental law.

Court Disposition

Permission for judicial review refused