SIB unsuccessful in challenge to judicial review of its investigation of Interdata (UK) Ltd R v SIB ex parte Interdata (UK) Ltd
| Pages | 81-82 |
| Date | 01 January 1997 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/eb024911 |
| Published date | 01 January 1997 |
| Author | Joanna Gray |
| Subject Matter | Accounting & finance |
Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance Volume 5 Number 1
SIB unsuccessful in challenge to judicial review
of its investigation of Interdata (UK) Ltd
R v SIB ex parte Interdata (UK) Ltd
Court of Appeal, Civil Division: Leggatt LJ and Schiemann LJ
Date of Judgment: 13th September, 1996
THE FACTS
Interdata (UK) Ltd, and in particular a direc-
tor, Mr Colin French, devised a computer pro-
gram to provide information on past price
movements of shares to investors. The SIB's
concern with the marketing of this pro-
gramme by Interdata (UK) Ltd was that it
might constitute the provision of investment
advice and therefore require authorisation
under the Financial Services Act 1986 (FSA).
For that reason, SIB had been showing con-
cern for some months and Interdata (UK) Ltd
had therefore shown SIB the operation of the
program. However, without warning on 10th
September, 1996 Interdata received a letter
(dated 9th September) from SIB pursuant to
its power of investigation in s.105 FSA
addressed to Mr French requiring him to pro-
duce by 4.30 pm on 12th September, 1996 the
following categories of documents:
— Interdata's full client list including names,
addresses and telephone numbers
— name, address and telephone number of the
program's software designer
— copy of the program with all necessary
access codes
— copies of instructions from Interdata to the
software designer
— names and addresses of all Interdata's
bankers together with details of all account
numbers and mandates
— name and address of Interdata's auditors
— such books and records of Interdata as
would show the income and expenditure
of the company.
Mr French, the program's software designer,
was in Hong Kong until 26th September, 1996
so,
when it received this letter Interdata
applied to the High Court for leave to apply
for judicial review. On 11th September, 1996
Mance J granted leave setting 30th September
as the date for judicial review (SIB declined
the offer of an earlier date) and ordered a stay
in respect of the SIB's request for documents
except for the software designer's details, the
copy of the program and Interdata's auditors'
name and address.
THE ACTION
The SIB applied to the Court of Appeal for
leave to appeal against the order of Mance J
on the grounds that, although it accepted the
supervisory jurisdiction of judicial review over
its conduct, the court ought not to proceed to
a judicial review in circumstances where it
would or might interfere with a SIB investiga-
tion.
DECISION
The SIB's appeal was dismissed, Leggatt LJ
giving the judgment of the court and dismiss-
ing the SIB's argument that to subject its exer-
cise of its s.105 power to a judicial review
would hamper its investigation.
Page 81
To continue reading
Request your trial