Rocker v Full Circle Asset Management [2017] EWHC 2999 (QB) (23 November 2017)

Rocker v Full Circle Asset Management [2017] EWHC 2999 (QB) (23 November 2017)

The court found that FCAM breached its contractual and statutory duties by failing to keep the IC Portfolio within the agreed risk mandate for substantial periods, and that this breach caused loss to Mr Rocker. However, the court rejected the claim that FCAM was contractually obliged to operate an automatic stop loss policy at a 5% threshold, finding no such binding term or representation. The court also found that while there were some technical breaches of COBS, these did not cause additional loss beyond the breach of mandate. The claim for opportunity loss was rejected as misconceived. Damages were awarded for the loss caused by breach of the risk mandate, calculated as £573,229.40.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 2999 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: David Rocker; Defendant: Full Circle Asset Management
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 November 2017
Procedural Posture
High Court Civil Claim (queen's Bench Division) / Final Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim partly allowed
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Negligence, Breach of Statutory Duty, Investment Management, Risk Management, Stop Loss Policy, Opportunity Loss, Financial Conduct Authority (fca) Rules, COBS Compliance
Contract Law Financial Services Regulation Tort Law Breach of Contract Negligence Breach of Statutory Duty Investment Management Risk Management +4 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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Rocker

Claimant

Full Circle Asset Management

Defendant

Procedural Posture

High Court Civil Claim (queen's Bench Division) / Final Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether FCAM breached its contractual and statutory duties in managing the IC Portfolio
  2. 2 Whether FCAM exceeded the agreed risk mandate for the portfolio
  3. 3 Whether FCAM was contractually or otherwise obliged to operate a stop loss policy and if so, whether it breached that obligation

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that FCAM breached its contractual and statutory duties by failing to keep the IC Portfolio within the agreed risk mandate for substantial periods, and that this breach caused loss to Mr Rocker. However, the court rejected the claim that FCAM was contractually obliged to operate an automatic stop loss policy at a 5% threshold, finding no such binding term or representation. The court also found that while there were some technical breaches of COBS, these did not cause additional loss beyond the breach of mandate. The claim for opportunity loss was rejected as misconceived. Damages were awarded for the loss caused by breach of the risk mandate, calculated as £573,229.40.

Court Disposition

Claim partly allowed

Orders

  • Judgment for the claimant for £573,229.40 for breach of risk mandate
  • All other claims, including stop loss and opportunity loss, dismissed