Ford v Financial Services Authority & Anor [2012] EWHC 997 (Admin) (18 April 2012)

Ford v Financial Services Authority & Anor [2012] EWHC 997 (Admin) (18 April 2012)

The Warning Notice should not be quashed as the privileged material played only a peripheral role and its removal does not substantially affect the regulatory case; appropriate relief is redaction of privileged material, prohibition on its use, and steps to ensure destruction and non-dissemination by the FSA and third parties.

Citation
[2012] EWHC 997 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Stewart Ford; Defendant: Financial Services Authority; Interested Party: Peter Johnson; Interested Party: Mark Owen
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 April 2012
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Remedies Hearing Following Substantive Judgment
Outcome
Warning Notice not quashed; application for judicial review of protective warning notice dismissed; relief granted includes redaction, destruction, and prohibition on use of privileged material.
Legal Topics
Legal Professional Privilege, Disclosure, Regulatory Investigations, Remedies, Confidentiality, Bias and Recusal
Administrative Law Financial Regulation Legal Professional Privilege Disclosure Regulatory Investigations Remedies Confidentiality Bias and Recusal

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

Parties

Stewart Ford

Claimant

Financial Services Authority

Defendant

Peter Johnson

Interested Party

Mark Owen

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Remedies Hearing Following Substantive Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Warning Notice should be quashed due to reliance on privileged material
  2. 2 Appropriate remedies for dissemination and use of privileged material by the FSA
  3. 3 Disclosure obligations regarding privileged material sent to third parties

Ratio Decidendi

The Warning Notice should not be quashed as the privileged material played only a peripheral role and its removal does not substantially affect the regulatory case; appropriate relief is redaction of privileged material, prohibition on its use, and steps to ensure destruction and non-dissemination by the FSA and third parties.

Court Disposition

Warning Notice not quashed; application for judicial review of protective warning notice dismissed; relief granted includes redaction, destruction, and prohibition on use of privileged material.

Orders

  • FSA to use best endeavours to retrieve and destroy hard and electronic copies of privileged material, SIR, and Warning Notices; redact references in documents and emails; retain copies only for litigation and audit purposes securely.
  • FSA to send letters to all recipients of privileged material requesting return, destruction, and confirmation of non-use; claimant's solicitors to receive copies of such correspondence and responses.