Financial Services Authority v Sinaloa Gold plc and others (Barclays Bank plc intervening) [2013] UKSC 11, [2013] All ER (D) 320 (Feb)
Supreme Court, Lord Neuberger, Lady Hale, Lord Mance, Lord Clarke and Lord Sumption SCJJ, 27 Feb 2013
There is no general rule that an authority such as the FSA, acting pursuant to a public law duty, should be required to give a cross-undertaking in respect of losses incurred by third parties.
Nicholas Vineall QC, James Purchas & Adam Temple (instructed by the Financial Services Authority Legal Department) for the FSA. Richard Handyside QC and Tamara Oppenheimer (instructed by Barclays Bank plc Legal Services) for the bank. The defendants did not appear and were not represented.
Proceedings were issued by the Financial Services Authority (FSA) against three defendants, on the basis that: (i) the first defendant company was promoting the sale of shares without being authorised to do so and without an approved prospectus, contrary to ss 21 and 85 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA 2000); (ii) the second and third defendants were
