The presiding judge in an appeal case involving an unregulated pension introducer has recused himself, International Adviser can reveal.
Alexandra Associates traded as Avacade Future Solutions and, together with Avacade (currently in liquidation) provided pension services without authorisation from the regulator.
The FCA informed clients in November 2018 that it was taking legal action against the two firms, because they were not authorised to provide financial advice and they misled clients.
On 30 June 2020, the high court upheld the watchdog’s claims.
But Zakery Khub Solicitors, the law firm representing two of the directors involved, namely Craig and Lee Lummins, and Alexandria Associates appealed the decision on 9 July 2020.
Conflict of interest
Zakery Khub also sought to recuse the judge involved in the case, Adam Johnson, as the firm believed he had conflicts of interest.
The petition stemmed from the fact that the FCA instructed law firm Herbert Smith Freehills (HSF) on a test case on covid-related business interruption insurance in the high court.
Judge Johnson is an equity partner at the law firm, which Zakery Khub claimed could not lead to a fair and impartial trial, since its clients’ appeal was against the regulator, which is now a client of the law firm he has links to.
Personal matter
Johnson did not wait for the outcome of the petition and directly recused himself from the case on 14 July 2020.
Omid Khub, managing director at Zakery Khub Solicitors, told IA: “We welcome the decision by the judge who, on our application and following a hearing, agreed to step down from hearing any future proceedings in this case, including the second trial of quantum.
“The judge clearly agreed that it would be inappropriate for him, as an equity partner of HSF, to continue to be sitting as a judge going forward.
“We hoped that we would not have been forced to make a costly application, and that the FCA should have realised this and agreed to the recusal proposal, as we asked the FCA to do so.”
Despite successfully recusing the judge, the appeal claim by Alexandra Associates and its directors was rejected.
“We are disappointed that the judge did not give us permission to appeal his decision. We intend to take the matter to the court of appeal in order to seek, much needed clarity on this area of law,” Khub added.
