Chhabra & Anor v Financial Services Authority [2009] UKFSM FSM072 (29 December 2009)

Chhabra & Anor v Financial Services Authority [2009] UKFSM FSM072 (29 December 2009)

The Tribunal found, on the balance of probabilities and considering the totality of the evidence, that on each of the three occasions Mr Chhabra was in possession of relevant information not generally available, disclosed it to Mr Patel, and Mr Patel placed bets in reliance on that information. The pattern, timing, and improbability of coincidence, together with the nature of the information and the applicants' conduct, established market abuse under s.118(2)(a) FSMA 2000. The applicants' explanations were not accepted as credible or sufficient to rebut the inference of market abuse.

Citation
[2009] UKFSM FSM072
Parties
First Applicant: Robin Chhabra; Second Applicant: Sameer Patel; Respondent: Financial Services Authority
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
29 December 2009
Procedural Posture
Tribunal Reference (market Abuse) / Liability Determination (penalty and Prohibition to Be Determined Separately)
Outcome
Applicants found liable for market abuse under s.118(2)(a) FSMA 2000. Determination of penalty and prohibition orders reserved for later hearing.
Legal Topics
Market Abuse, Insider Trading, Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, Code of Market Conduct, Prohibition Orders
Financial Services Law Market Regulation Administrative Law Market Abuse Insider Trading Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 Code of Market Conduct Prohibition Orders

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 5 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robin Chhabra

First Applicant

Sameer Patel

Second Applicant

Financial Services Authority

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Tribunal Reference (market Abuse) / Liability Determination (penalty and Prohibition to Be Determined Separately)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants engaged in market abuse under s.118 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 by trading on the basis of relevant information not generally available.
  2. 2 Whether Mr Chhabra disclosed inside information to Mr Patel, and whether Mr Patel relied on such information in placing spread bets.
  3. 3 Whether the circumstantial evidence sufficed to infer market abuse.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found, on the balance of probabilities and considering the totality of the evidence, that on each of the three occasions Mr Chhabra was in possession of relevant information not generally available, disclosed it to Mr Patel, and Mr Patel placed bets in reliance on that information. The pattern, timing, and improbability of coincidence, together with the nature of the information and the applicants' conduct, established market abuse under s.118(2)(a) FSMA 2000. The applicants' explanations were not accepted as credible or sufficient to rebut the inference of market abuse.

Court Disposition

Applicants found liable for market abuse under s.118(2)(a) FSMA 2000. Determination of penalty and prohibition orders reserved for later hearing.