Key Facts
- •The All-Party Parliamentary Group on Fair Business Banking (APP Group) challenged the Financial Conduct Authority's (FCA) decision not to take further action regarding redress for mis-sold interest rate hedging products (IRHPs).
- •The FCA's decision followed an Independent Review which concluded that the eligibility criteria for the redress scheme were inappropriately narrow.
- •The FCA disagreed with the Review's conclusion, arguing its approach was reasonable and proportionate.
- •The APP Group argued the FCA's decision was unreasonable and procedurally unfair.
- •The APP Group's standing to bring the claim was challenged by the FCA.
Legal Principles
Reasonableness review of public authority decisions.
Common Law
Procedural fairness in decision-making.
Common Law
Standing for judicial review.
Common Law
Statutory materiality test under section 31(3C)(3D) of the Senior Courts Act 1981.
Senior Courts Act 1981, s.31(3C)(3D)
Consumer protection under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, section 1C(1).
Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, s.1C(1)
Outcomes
Permission for judicial review granted.
The court found the APP Group's claims were arguable on both substantive and procedural grounds, and the FCA's 'highly likely' test for refusing permission was not met. The APP Group has sufficient interest and standing.
Reciprocal costs cap imposed.
A 40% cap on costs based on the APP Group's funding for the claim.
Time extended for FCA's response.
To allow the FCA to file its detailed grounds of resistance and evidence.