A Supreme Court victory for the Financial Services Authority (FSA) could result in the regulator becoming more litigious, according to law firm Taylor Wessing.
The case - involving the FSA, Sinaloa Gold and Barclays - could result in problems for banks and other financial institutions as the ruling means seeking financial injunctions is now less risky for the regulator, according to the law firm. Shane Gleghorn, head of commercial disputes and a partner at Taylor Wessing explained: "As a result of the decision the FSA will not always be required to give an undertaking that it will compensate for damages incurred by innocent third parties, such as banks, as a result of it obtaining a freezing injunction against a financial institution's client. ...
To continue reading this article...
Join Investment Week for free
- Unlimited access to real-time news, analysis and opinion from the investment industry, including the Sustainable Hub covering fund news from the ESG space
- Get ahead of regulatory and technological changes affecting fund management
- Important and breaking news stories selected by the editors delivered straight to your inbox each day
- Weekly members-only newsletter with exclusive opinion pieces from leading industry experts
- Be the first to hear about our extensive events schedule and awards programmes