Judgment has been handed down in a heavily publicised judicial review claim brought by the British Bankers Association (“BBA”) against the FSA.
The BBA challenged the lawfulness of the FSA’s package of rules and guidance concerning the payment of redress to consumers for the mis-selling of Payment Protection Insurance (“PPI”). Mr Justice Ouseley upheld the FSA’s arguments and dismissed the BBA’s challenge on all grounds.
The judgment affects the interests of hundreds of thousands of consumers seeking redress for the alleged mis-selling of PPI. The cost to the banking industry of the FSA’s measures is estimated to be between £1.1 billion to £3.2 billion. The case has also provided landmark guidance as to the relationship between the FSA’s high-level regulatory Principles and its more detailed rules.
Lord Pannick QC, Charles Flint QC, Javan Herberg QC and Simon Pritchard appeared for the BBA, together with Michael Fordham QC and Paul Luckhurst who appeared for an interested party supporting the BBA’s arguments.