||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 168 (Oct)
|| EWHC 2775 (Ch)
Mr Kevin Prosser QC (Sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court)
||Tim Penny and Philip Hinks (instructed by the FSA) for the claimant.
||Philip Coppel QC and Vivienne Tanchel (instructed by Aegis Tax LLP) for the third and fifth defendants.
||The other defendants did not appear and were not represented.
||16 October 2012
Practice - Preliminary point of law - Matters appropriate to be considered as preliminary issues - Instant proceedings arising out of proceedings brought by claimant Financial Services Authority against defendants for various alleged breaches of legislative provision - Question arising as to meaning of 'day-to-day control' arising in course of proceedings - Whether appropriate for question to be considered as preliminary question - .
Practice Preliminary point of law. In the course of proceedings against a number of defendants by the Financial Services Authority, a preliminary question arose as to the meaning of 'day-to-day control' within of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000. The court held that the various factors in the case pointed in favour of answering the question in the course of a full trial, and so ruled that it would not answer the question on a preliminary basis.
- An Official transcript is the final version of the judgment prepared by shorthand writers. LexisLibrary contains all judgments from the High Court and aboveView Judgment
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases