RegulationMar 6 2015

Tribunal backs FCA fine, rejects integrity ruling

twitter-iconfacebook-iconlinkedin-iconmail-iconprint-icon
Search supported by
Tribunal backs FCA fine, rejects integrity ruling

The Upper Tribunal has upheld the Financial Conduct Authority’s decision to impose a penalty of £89,000 on Tariq Carrimjee, formerly of Somerset Asset Management, but has not upheld a finding that he failed to ‘act with integrity’.

This is the first time since changes were made to the tribunal’s powers that it has remitted part of a case back to the FCA to reconsider and reach a decision as to the extent of any prohibition in accordance its findings.

In August 2013, the FCA fined Mr Carrimjee and banned him from performing any role in regulated financial services.

It has also fined David Davis, senior partner and compliance officer of broker firm Paul E Schweder Miller & Co, £70,258, and Vandana Parikh, a broker at the same firm, £45,673, for their respective roles in market manipulation.

The tribunal’s decision was issued today (6 March) after three days of hearing during September and remains open to the parties to appeal this judgment. The decision follows the final notices issued to Mr Goenka, Mrs Parikh and Mr Davis in relation to the same matter.

In November 2011, the Financial Services Authority issued Dubai-based private investor Rameshkumar Goenka with a fine of $9.6m for market abuse, the largest fine it had ever imposed on an individual.

According to the regulator, Mr Goenka manipulated the closing price of Reliance Industries securities on the London Stock Exchange in October 2010 to avoid a loss of $3.1m under the terms of a structured product he held.

The FCA concluded that Mr Parikh failed to act with due skill, care and diligence by explaining the process of manipulation to Mr Goenka without recognising the risk that this posed and without proper challenge or enquiry as to his intentions.

Carrimjee, an investment manager, held senior positions at Somerset at the relevant time and was responsible for compliance oversight.

The tribunal found he failed to act with due skill, care and diligence in failing to escalate the risk that his client, Mr Goenka, might have been intending to engage in market manipulation.

peter.walker@ft.com