£7.4 million claim dismissed

Wednesday 17 June 2020

A banned financial services director's £7.4 million claim against the GFSC for "breaching his human rights" has been thrown out by Guernsey's Royal Court.

Alan Chick was sanctioned by the Guernsey Financial Services Commission in 2018 after it found he had breached the Commission’s licensing regulations relating to competence, protecting clients’ interests and understanding of legal and professional obligations.

He was fined £50,000 and banned from directorships and other senior rules within financial services companies for five years.

Mr Chick hit back at the GFSC and last year took his grievances with the regulatory body to the Royal Court, claiming it breached his human rights during an investigation it carried out into his conduct when working in financial services.

He wanted multi-million pound compensation for the loss of salary and investment he said he had suffered since the GFSC’s ruling.

Pictured: The sums of money that Mr Chick believed he was owed by the GFSC.

Mr Chick argued that the GFSC had breached articles six, seven, and 14 of the Human Rights convention, saying the Commission “took a pro-active decision on what evidence was or was not included in the Commission’s evidence bundle” and that “any failure to obtain or the apparent suppression of the relevant evidence lays squarely with the Commission."   

However, the appeal was struck out by the Royal Court for having no basis in law.

In a statement, the GFSC said the ruling had made some important clarifications to its enforcement procedures.

“On 12 June 2020, the Royal Court found in favour of the Commission’s application to have the above matter [Mr Chick’s legal action] struck out.  Mr Chick had brought a claim, against the Commission, that the enforcement proceedings which were found against him on 31 May 2018 amounted to a breach of his human rights. 

Pictured:  The GFSC regulates all of Guernsey's financial services industry, with the aim of protecting its reputation on the international stage. 

“This ruling provides clarification on the position of the Commission’s enforcement procedure and the classification of the Commission’s regulatory offences under the Human Rights framework within the Bailiwick.

“Firstly, it confirms that the Commission’s enforcement procedure, by way of the right of appeal to the Royal Court, is compliant with Article 6 – The Right to a Fair Trial.  Secondly, it confirms that the regulatory offences, pursued by the Commission’s Enforcement Division, are to be regarded as regulatory matters and do not fall under the definition of criminal offences.”