GUERNSEY – The GFSC IS DENIED PERMISSION TO APPEAL AT FIRST INSTANCE

Following the Judgment handed down by the Royal Court on 18 April 2023 in the case of Domaille, Clarke & Hannis vs the GFSC, the GFSC has been denied permission at first instance by LB Marshall KC to appeal.

The application was heard on 19 June 2023, and the Judge communicated the decision at the hearing.

The GFSC put forward various grounds, all of which were refused by the Judge. In summary:

1. First, the GFSC attempted to argue that the Judge had, amongst other things, “improperly pre-judged the issues” within the case.
   • It was held that this argument by the GFSC represented a “complete distortion and misrepresentation” of the Judgment as a whole, and
   • That this ground of appeal (along with the related arguments) had no real prospect of success.
2. The GFSC asserted that the Judge had misapplied the Guernsey Anti-Money Laundering Regime by taking into account, when considering the reasonableness and proportionality of the sanctions,
   • The fact that the relevant breaches had not “in the event, resulted in any discernible damage to either members of the public or to the reputation of the Bailiwick”.
   • Once again, this argument was held not to have any real prospect of success.
3. The GFSC argued that the Judge had
   • Committed an error of law as to the application of the test for probity, and
   • Also erred in law in “misconstruing and unlawfully ‘limiting’ the scope of the Commission’s power to impose a prohibition order”.

As to the first element,

• The Judge found that she was unable to see the error of law in what the GFSC had put forward.

The second limb

• Was dismissed as the GFSC having “once again” misconstrued the Judgment.

4. The fourth ground was that the Judge had erred in law in holding

• “That financial penalties had to be assessed by reference to fining powers applicable under legislation no longer in force”.

In short, the Judge concluded that:

• “Once again, this is an exaggerated misstatement of what I did hold”, and found that this ground of appeal does not disclose “any potential error of law, nor anything but the Commission’s apparent disagreement with my assessment of the situation as a matter of fact”.

Domaille, Clarke & Hannis vs the GFSC – see below

• https://www.guernseylegalresources.gg/unreported-judgments/2023/2023-grc017/
• https://www.guernseylegalresources.gg/CHttpHandler.ashx?documentid=84276

The formal note of the Judgment is now available here.

• https://www.guernseylegalresources.gg/unreported-judgments/2023/2023-grc025/
• https://www.guernseylegalresources.gg/CHttpHandler.ashx?documentid=84404

Click below to read more.

• https://sites-appleby.vuturevx.com/20/19160/july-2023/gfsc-denied-permission-to-appeal-at-first-instance.asp?sid=3d190730-1049-4eca-ba00-559e48158778
• https://www.applebyglobal.com/news/gfsc-denied-permission-to-appeal-at-first-instance/?sid=3d190730-1049-4eca-ba00-559e48158778&utm_source=vuture&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=gue%20-%20gfsc%20denied%20permission%20to%20appeal%20at%20first%20instance%20-%205%20july%202023%20(sh)