Linear Investments Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v Financial Ombudsman Service Ltd (Rev1) [2024] EWHC 1428 (Admin) (13 June 2024)

Linear Investments Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v Financial Ombudsman Service Ltd (Rev1) [2024] EWHC 1428 (Admin) (13 June 2024)

The Ombudsman did not err in law or act irrationally in finding that Professor Willcocks was an eligible complainant as a consumer, that Linear failed to conduct an adequate assessment for elective professional client status, that the chosen compensation benchmark was rational, and that there was no basis for contributory fault. All grounds of the claim for judicial review are dismissed.

Citation
[2024] EWHC 1428 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Linear Investments Limited; Defendant: Financial Ombudsman Service Limited; Interested Party: Professor Leslie Willcocks
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 June 2024
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment on Merits
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Client Classification, Ombudsman Jurisdiction, Consumer Protection, Investment Services, Judicial Review, Compensation Assessment
Financial Services Law Administrative Law Regulatory Law Client Classification Ombudsman Jurisdiction Consumer Protection Investment Services Judicial Review +1 more

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 5 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Linear Investments Limited

Claimant

Financial Ombudsman Service Limited

Defendant

Professor Leslie Willcocks

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment on Merits

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Professor Willcocks was an eligible complainant under DISP 2.7.9AR as a consumer despite being categorised as an elective professional client
  2. 2 Whether the Ombudsman erred in reviewing and overturning Linear's client classification assessment
  3. 3 Whether the measure of redress (benchmark for compensation) adopted by the Ombudsman was irrational

Ratio Decidendi

The Ombudsman did not err in law or act irrationally in finding that Professor Willcocks was an eligible complainant as a consumer, that Linear failed to conduct an adequate assessment for elective professional client status, that the chosen compensation benchmark was rational, and that there was no basis for contributory fault. All grounds of the claim for judicial review are dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • All grounds of the claim for judicial review are dismissed.