header-logo header-logo

31 March 2017
Issue: 7740 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Financial services

Financial Conduct Authority v Macris [2017] UKSC 19, [2017] All ER (D) 153 (Mar)

The Supreme Court, in allowing an appeal by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), held that the respondent former international chief investment officer of JP Morgan Chase Bank NA, which had been fined by the Financial Conduct Authority after incurring losses of $6bn in respect of a trading portfolio, was not a third party for the purposes of s 393 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000. Accordingly, he had not been entitled to be notified in notices sent to the bank by the FCA, under s 393. The court held, among other things, that, on the true construction of s 393 of the Act, a person was “identified” in a notice, under that section, if he was identified by name or by a synonym for him, such as his office or job title.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll