C, R (on the application of) v Financial Services Authority (FSA)

C, R (on the application of) v Financial Services Authority (FSA)

The Decision Notice failed to provide adequate reasons for rejecting the claimant’s representations, contrary to section 388(1)(b) of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000. The statutory alternative remedy of reference to the Upper Tribunal was not suitable to remedy this failure, as the Tribunal cannot...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: The Queen (on the application of C); Defendant: Financial Services Authority
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 May 2012
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Decision Notice quashed; matter remitted to a different RDC for reconsideration.
Legal Topics
Adequacy of Reasons, Judicial Review, Alternative Remedies, Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, Disciplinary Proceedings
Administrative Law Financial Regulation Adequacy of Reasons Judicial Review Alternative Remedies Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 Disciplinary Proceedings

Source-derived case record

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 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Queen (on the application of C)

Claimant

Financial Services Authority

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Decision Notice issued by the FSA's Regulatory Decisions Committee gave adequate reasons as required by section 388(1)(b) of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000
  2. 2 Whether judicial review is available where an alternative statutory remedy exists (reference to the Upper Tribunal)
  3. 3 Whether the failure to give adequate reasons caused substantial prejudice to the claimant

Ratio Decidendi

The Decision Notice failed to provide adequate reasons for rejecting the claimant’s representations, contrary to section 388(1)(b) of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000. The statutory alternative remedy of reference to the Upper Tribunal was not suitable to remedy this failure, as the Tribunal cannot require the FSA to give reasons. The inadequacy of reasons caused substantial prejudice to the claimant. Therefore, the Decision Notice must be quashed.

Court Disposition

Decision Notice quashed; matter remitted to a different RDC for reconsideration.

Orders

  • The Decision Notice issued by the FSA is quashed.
  • The matter is to be remitted to a different Regulatory Decisions Committee for reconsideration.