SWM Ltd. v. Jersey Fin. Servs. Commn. [2016] 1 JLR 65 (21 January 2016)
A payment for expert evidence to respond to regulatory action may be considered in the ordinary course of business, depending on the specific facts, and is not automatically excluded because it is exceptional or one-off.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] 1 JLR 65
- Parties
- Applicant: SWM Ltd.; Respondent: Jersey Financial Services Commission
- Jurisdiction
- Jersey
- Judgment Date
- 21 January 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Directions / Judgment
- Outcome
- Application allowed
- Legal Topics
- Directions by Regulatory Authority, Ordinary Course of Business, Payments for Expert Evidence
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
SWM Ltd.
Applicant
Jersey Financial Services Commission
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Application for Directions / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether payment for expert evidence in response to regulatory action is in the 'ordinary course of business' under a direction by the Jersey Financial Services Commission.
Ratio Decidendi
A payment for expert evidence to respond to regulatory action may be considered in the ordinary course of business, depending on the specific facts, and is not automatically excluded because it is exceptional or one-off.
Court Disposition
Application allowed
Orders
- Payment for expert evidence permitted as in the ordinary course of business
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment