The Financial Conduct Authority v Golding & Ors

The Financial Conduct Authority v Golding & Ors

Separate distributions should be made for the DWS and OEL schemes because the schemes were distinct, investments and losses are traceable to each, and fairness does not require pooling. Losses should be calculated as capital invested minus returns received, and only out-of-pocket losses are compensable. Aggregator and non-responding investors are to be treated according to their direct relationship with the schemes.

Parties
Claimant: The Financial Conduct Authority; Defendant: Samuel Anthony Golding; Defendant: Shantelle Deacon (also known as Shantelle Golding); Defendant: Digital Wealth Limited; Defendant: Outsourcing Express Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 February 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment on Application for Directions Under S.382(3) FSMA
Outcome
Application granted
Legal Topics
Restitution Orders, Distribution of Recovered Funds, Unregulated Investment Schemes, Ponzi Schemes, Collective Investment Schemes
Financial Services Law Civil Procedure Restitution Orders Distribution of Recovered Funds Unregulated Investment Schemes Ponzi Schemes Collective Investment Schemes

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

Parties

The Financial Conduct Authority

Claimant

Samuel Anthony Golding

Defendant

Shantelle Deacon (also known as Shantelle Golding)

Defendant

Digital Wealth Limited

Defendant

Outsourcing Express Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment on Application for Directions Under S.382(3) FSMA

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there should be a single scheme of distribution or separate schemes for each investment scheme
  2. 2 The proper approach to calculating investor loss for distribution
  3. 3 Treatment of specific categories of investors (aggregators, non-responding, etc.)

Ratio Decidendi

Separate distributions should be made for the DWS and OEL schemes because the schemes were distinct, investments and losses are traceable to each, and fairness does not require pooling. Losses should be calculated as capital invested minus returns received, and only out-of-pocket losses are compensable. Aggregator and non-responding investors are to be treated according to their direct relationship with the schemes.

Court Disposition

Application granted

Orders

  • Separate distributions ordered: £953,195.75 to DWS scheme investors, £2,489,550.47 to OEL scheme investors
  • Losses to be calculated as capital invested minus returns received; only out-of-pocket losses qualify