Simon Pritchard

Simon acted for the Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) in a matter where it imposed a fine of £87 million on Credit Suisse International and Credit Suisse Securities for significant failures in risk management and governance in connection with the firms’ exposures to a client.

It is the highest fine imposed by the PRA to date and the only time a PRA enforcement investigation has established breaches of four PRA Fundamental Rules: Rules 2, 3, 5 and 6 of the PRA Rulebook.

The PRA found that the firms’ risk management oversight and practices fell well below the regulatory standards required. The failings were found to be symptomatic of an unsound risk culture within the business line that failed to balance considerations of risk against commercial reward appropriately. The firms were also found to have failed to learn from past similar experiences and had insufficiently addressed concerns previously raised by the PRA.

Simon appeared before the Dubai Financial Markets Tribunal in 2021 in relation to action taken by the Dubai Financial Services Authority to impose sanctions on former La Tresorerie SEO, Gilles Rollett.

Mr Rollet's appeal was dismissed by the Financial Markets Tribunal in January 2022.

Simon acted for Lloyds Bank in a trial of two preliminary issues arising in a claim against the Bank regarding their review of the sale of interest rate hedging products.

Simon acted for the Bank in this case, where the FCA imposed a fine of £102,163,200 on Standard Chartered Bank for Anti-Money Laundering breaches. The penalty was reduced from £155 million at a contested hearing before the FCA’s Regulatory Decisions Committee, where it was decided that the initial figure was too high.

Simon acted for the FCA in a case where the Upper Tribunal ultimately decided that it was appropriate for the FCA to impose a penalty of £409,300 on Linear Investments Limited for a breach of Principle 3 of the Principles for Businesses.

Acted for the Skilled Person in this case where the High Court set out the approach to take when considering whether to sanction a proposed ring-fencing transfer scheme.

Act for the Commissioners in this appeal concerning time limits for raising post clearance demands under the Customs Code. 

Acted for the Claimants in this warranties claim concerning a Share Sale Agreement.

Acted for the Interested Party in this matter concerning a Validation Order that had been made by the FCA in respect of numerous regulated credit agreements. 

Acted for the FCA in this reference by the owner of an IFA advising clients on transferring occupational or personal pension benefits into a self-invested pension scheme. The Tribunal considered amongst other things the regulatory obligations that applied to firms giving such advice.

Represent the Claimant in this judicial review concerning the FOS’ jurisdiction in relation to complaints made about the principal of an appointed representative.

Acting for Scion in relation to a claim concerning various film finance schemes. The claim is, in large part, a general commercial dispute but it includes considerations of difficult tax issues as well as responding to a request for Further Information. 

Acted for FCA in this enforcement action concerning its decision to ban the former CEO of a firm operating a national network of almost 400 appointed representatives and 516 registered individuals from performing FCA significant influence functions.

Advised LME in relation to public law issues regarding its Charge Capping framework, and in particular, the challenge and appeals process.

Acted for the FCA in this, the first reference to the Upper Tribunal by a debt counselling company challenging the FCA’s decision to end its interim permission to carry on regulated activities. The case confirmed the Tribunal’s jurisdiction to grant interim relief in such cases and explained the test to be applied when considering whether or not to grant interim relief.

The High Court exercised for the first time its s.129 FSMA powers to impose penalties (totalling £7.5m) for market abuse and granting final injunctions restraining market abuse in respect of “layering and spoofing” conduct.  This case was featured in The Times. Javan Herberg QC led Simon, acting for the FCA.

Acted for the Appellant, a financial services company, in this appeal regarding the scope and meaning of Article 25 of the Regulated Activities Order.

A dispute between a principal and an appointed representative. Amongst other things, the Court of Appeal considered the effect of the parties agreeing to describe the term of a contract as a condition. The Court found that, on a proper construction, the parties had agreed that a term of a contract described as a condition was a condition of the contract and therefore breach of the term gave the innocent party the right to terminate the contract. By deciding otherwise at first instance, the Judge erred. Simon acted for Personal Touch on the appeal.

The Upper Tribunal refused Money Matcher’s application to suspend the effect of the Decision Notice refusing its application for full authorisation, with the result that the firm’s interim permission automatically ceased. Simon acted for the FCA.

The first case in which the Upper Tribunal considered the effect of a Decision Notice rejecting an application for full authorisation on a firm’s interim permission. The Upper Tribunal decided that the interim permission ceases automatically upon the giving of the Decision Notice and therefore a firm wishing to continue their interim permission must make an application to the Tribunal to suspend the effect of the Decision Notice. Javan Herberg QC led Simon, acting for the FCA.

The Upper Tribunal found that the applicant’s conduct fell below the standard to be expected of somebody fulfilling a significant function and demonstrated a serious lack of competence. The Upper Tribunal found that the conduct warranted a financial penalty and a partial prohibition. Simon acted for the FCA.

The Upper Tribunal refused the Applicant’s application to refer his case to the Upper Tribunal Tribunal out of time. The case raised unique questions about the impact of a settlement on the reference procedure. Simon acted for the FCA.  

The Court of Appeal upheld the Upper Tribunal decision upholding the FSA’s decision to impose a fine of £8m on Swift Trade for market abuse. The Court of Appeal agreed that Swift Trade had committed market abuse by trading contracts for difference and that it sought to conceal the abusive trading from regulators. Furthermore, the Court of Appeal rejected Swift Trade’s argument that the misconduct fell outside the statutory market abuse regime because Swift Trade were dealing in contract for differences and not trading directly in shares.  Tim Otty QC led Simon, acting for the FSA.

The Upper Tribunal dismissed the Applicant’s challenge of the FSA’s decision notice prohibiting him from performing any controlled function involving the exercise of significant influence in relation to any regulated activity carried on by any authorised person, exempt person or exempt professional firm. The Applicant, a former managing director of a mortgage broker, was found to have failed to establish adequate systems and controls to prevent financial crime and to have failed to ensure there were robust compliance procedures in place. In reaching its conclusion, the Tribunal rejected the Applicant’s argument that the FSA’s case had an evidential lacuna in relation to matters of competence and capability and that those issues could only be addressed through expert evidence.  Simon acted for the FSA.

Appeared for FSA at hearing of reference to Tribunal from FSA Decision Notice imposing substantial financial penalties and withdrawal of permissions on management of hedge fund (Mercurius).

This case concerned the question of whether a director acted in accordance with his company law duties when transferring occupational and personal pension benefits into a self-invested pension scheme. It also examined whether a financial penalty would be appropriate and if so, whether this would be time barred and at what level it could be imposed. 

Simon represented HSBC in the Court of Appeal in a case regarding applications for security for costs and litigation funding, in the context of the ongoing civil claim brought by hundreds of investors in the Ingenious films and games schemes against various defendants, including promoters and banks. 

Simon acted for Lloyds Bank in a trial of two preliminary issues arising in a claim against the Bank regarding their review of the sale of interest rate hedging products.

Simon is acting for Rabobank in relation to claims brought by two former employees to recoup the costs of their defence of US criminal proceedings. 

Acted for the Skilled Person in this case where the High Court set out the approach to take when considering whether to sanction a proposed ring-fencing transfer scheme.

Acted for the Claimants in this warranties claim concerning a Share Sale Agreement.

Acting for Scion in relation to a claim concerning various film finance schemes. The claim is, in large part, a general commercial dispute but it includes considerations of difficult tax issues as well as responding to a request for Further Information. 

Acting for C3P in relation to a claim concerning a scheme that was intended to mitigate stamp duty. The claim is, in large part, a general commercial dispute but it includes considerations of difficult tax issues.

A dispute between a principal and an appointed representative. Amongst other things, the Court of Appeal considered the effect of the parties agreeing to describe the term of a contract as a condition. The Court found that, on a proper construction, the parties had agreed that a term of a contract described as a condition was a condition of the contract and therefore breach of the term gave the innocent party the right to terminate the contract. By deciding otherwise at first instance, the Judge erred. Simon acted for Personal Touch on the appeal.

Simon appeared in the Supreme Court for three of the claimants in the claim relating to the riots.

Simon appeared for HMRC in this appeal by the taxpayer regarding customs classification.

Simon is acting for Rabobank in relation to claims brought by two former employees to recoup the costs of their defence of US criminal proceedings. 

Represented the respondent in this 3 day unfair dismissal and breach of contract claim.

Represented the respondent in this 4 day unfair dismissal and breach of contract claim.

Simon acted for the SFO in a case concerning their ability to issue extraterritorial information notices. The decision will impact the practice of other regulators and public bodies, such as the FCA and HMRC, when issuing information requirements.

Simon appeared as junior counsel for the Secretary of State in this case where a panel of 7 judges of the Supreme Court considered the appropriate approach to the proportionality test when dealing with claims of unlawful discrimination in breach of Article 14 ECHR and the role of Article 3.1 of the UNCRC.

Acted for the Commissioners in this appeal concerning the application of the time limit for raising a tax assessment. The Court found that the knowledge required under section 12(4)(b) of the Finance Act 1994 was actual knowledge of evidence of facts sufficient to justify the making of an assessment requiring payment of unpaid duty, and not constructive knowledge. 

Act for the Commissioners in this appeal concerning corresponding deficiency relief. Also acted for the Commissioners in a connected judicial review which predated the tax appeal. 

Act for the Commissioners in this appeal concerning time limits for raising post clearance demands under the Customs Code. 

Advised LME in relation to public law issues regarding its Charge Capping framework, and in particular, the challenge and appeals process.

Represent the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions in this challenge of revisions to the ‘benefit cap’. 

Represented the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions in this challenge against the removal of the spare room subsidy (also known as the ‘benefit cap’). This appeal, heard by seven Supreme Court Judges, confirmed the “manifestly without reasonable foundation” justification test that is applicable in cases of discrimination in the sphere of economic and social policy.

Simon (led by James Eadie QC and Gemma White QC), represented the Secretary of State in this case concerning the removal of the spare room subsidy.

Represented the SFO in this judicial review to the SFO’s use of its investigatory powers and, in particular, a request for mutual assistance that it made to the Monegasque authorities. The SFO is investigating allegations of corruption and bribery, with details of the matters under investigation forming the basis of BBC Panorama programme in late October 2016.

Represent the Claimant in this judicial review concerning the FOS’ jurisdiction in relation to complaints made about the principal of an appointed representative.

Simon (led by James Eadie QC at first instance), represented the Secretary of State in this case concerning the benefit cap.

Simon acted for the Secretary of State in this judicial review regarding the availability of release on temporary licence to prisoners serving indeterminate prison sentences.

Simon (led by Michael Beloff QC), represented the London Metal Exchange in this case concerning the scope of the duty to consult. 

Simon (led by Kieron Beal QC) acted for HMRC in defence of challenge to the retrospective treatment of certain stamp duty land tax avoidance schemes.

Simon, led by James Eadie QC, represented HMRC in this case concerning Air Passenger Duty.

Simon acted for the claimants in this claim for judicial review regarding care homes. 

Eady J rejected the Claimants’ argument that the Secretary of State’s policy regarding the settlement of adult dependants of former Gurkhas is flawed for uncertainty or fails to reflect its underlying purpose. Furthermore, Eady J rejected the argument that the policy had been applied irrationally to the four Claimants. Simon represented the Secretary of State.

The court examined the extent to which the Serious Fraud Office could extraterritorially exercise powers conferred upon it by the Criminal Justice Act 1987 in order to request material from outside of the UK held by a foreign company. In an unprecedented judgment, the court held that the compulsory document production powers must necessarily have extraterritorial application in order to preserve their effectiveness. 

Simon (led by James Eadie QC and Gemma White QC), represented the Secretary of State in this case concerning the removal of the spare room subsidy.

Simon (led by James Eadie QC at first instance), represented the Secretary of State in this case concerning the benefit cap.

Simon acted for the Secretary of State in this judicial review regarding the availability of release on temporary licence to prisoners serving indeterminate prison sentences.

Simon (led by Michael Beloff QC), represented the London Metal Exchange in this case concerning the scope of the duty to consult. 

Simon (led by Kieron Beal QC) acted for HMRC in defence of challenge to the retrospective treatment of certain stamp duty land tax avoidance schemes.

Simon, led by Tim Otty QC, acts for the Claimant in this claim against Greece invoking Articles 3, 6, 13 and 14 of the ECHR.

Simon acted for HMRC in a trial concerning the tax consequences of a costly refurbishment of a stately home.

Simon successfully acted for HMRC in this Supreme Court appeal in a case concerning the applicable time limits for communicating customs debts. 

Simon successfully acted for the HMRC in an appeal from the Upper Tribunal concerning the operation of the “corresponding deficiency relief” (CDR) regime in the Income Tax (Trading and Other Income) Act 2005.

Acted for the Commissioners in this appeal concerning the application of the time limit for raising a tax assessment. The Court found that the knowledge required under section 12(4)(b) of the Finance Act 1994 was actual knowledge of evidence of facts sufficient to justify the making of an assessment requiring payment of unpaid duty, and not constructive knowledge. 

Act for the Commissioners in this appeal concerning corresponding deficiency relief. Also acted for the Commissioners in a connected judicial review which predated the tax appeal. 

Act for the Commissioners in this appeal concerning inward processing relief .

Simon, led by James Eadie QC, represented HMRC in this case concerning Air Passenger Duty.

Act for HMRC in this customs classification case regarding the duty payable on a plastic strap to the Apple Watch. 

Act for HMRC in this dispute regarding the VAT treatment of gift vouchers distributed by the Daily Mail as part of a marketing campaign.

Acting for Scion in relation to a claim concerning various film finance schemes. The claim is, in large part, a general commercial dispute but it includes considerations of difficult tax issues as well as responding to a request for Further Information. 

Acting for C3P in relation to a claim concerning a scheme that was intended to mitigate stamp duty. The claim is, in large part, a general commercial dispute but it includes considerations of difficult tax issues.

Act for HMRC in this dispute regarding the jurisdiction of the First Tier Tribunal in this appeal concerning excise duty in relation to goods that have been seized and condemned.

Acting for HMRC in this dispute regarding excise duty. The appeal relates to the date of HMRC’s knowledge for the purposes of determining whether an assessment for excise duty has been made within the relevant one-year time limit. The UT held that HMRC would only have knowledge of the “evidence of facts” sufficient to make an assessment when it had acquired knowledge of the evidence itself. That required it to have an opportunity to examine the evidence, rather than merely becoming aware of the existence of such evidence. 

Act for HMRC in this dispute regarding the customs classification of artificial turf that is designed to be used on golf courses.

Simon, led by Kieron Beal QC, acts for HMRC in this case concerning the legality of certain provisions in the Finance Act 2014 governing oil and gas drilling contractors. The High Court has referred a series of questions to the CJEU.

Simon, led by Kieron Beal QC, represented HMRC in this case concerning valuation of goods for customs purposes.

Simon represented HMRC in this dispute concerning anti-dumping duties.

Simon represented HMRC in this dispute concerning customs classification.

Simon represented HMRC in this dispute concerning customs classification.

Simon, led by Kieron Beal, represented HMRC in this dispute concerning out of time appeals.