Judges must avoid ‘hair trigger’ ruling in Carey appeal, QC says
By Michael Klimes 4
th March 2021 1:26 pm
There is no evidence a Sipp provider is responsible for the investment losses their former client suffered.
The argument was made by QC Andrew Green in the third day of a significant Court of Appeal hearing.
He said the case will have wide applicability and the judges should avoid coming to a “hair trigger” ruling.
The hearing concerns the exact duties Sipp providers have to vet unregulated investments arising from introducers.
Back in September the Court of Appeal granted Russell Adams permission to challenge a landmark Sipp ruling against Options UK Personal Pensions LLP.
Carey Pensions appeal ruling: first day round up
By Michael Klimes 2
nd March 2021 4:28 pm
The Sipp industry is in the spotlight again as a significant Court of Appeal battle got underway today.
The hearing concerns the exact duties Sipp providers have to vet unregulated investments arising from introducers.
It features names and companies
Money Marketing readers know well: Russell Adams and Options UK Personal Pensions LLP.
Options was formerly Carey Pensions, which Adams took to court over investment losses in storage pods.
Adams lost the initial civil case but won the right to appeal, prolonging the saga.
His legal defence, QC Gerard McMeel presented the reasons why Options should be liable for Adams’ investment losses.