United States: FCA Publishes Decision To Fine And Ban Former Non-Executive Director For Failing To Disclose Conflicts Of Interest

Last Updated: June 12 2013
Article by Charles Evans

The Financial Conduct Authority ("FCA") has published a decision notice dated 28 November 2012 which its predecessor, the Financial Services Authority ("FSA"), had issued to Angela Burns, a former non-executive director of two mutual societies. In the decision notice, the FSA concluded that Ms. Burns had failed to disclose certain conflicts of interest in breach of her obligations under Statement of Principle 11. The FSA imposed a fine of £154,800 and banned her from performing any future role in regulated financial services. Ms. Burns has referred the decision notice to the Upper Tribunal.

This is the first time the FCA (or its predecessor) has sought to impose such a severe sanction on a non-executive director for non-disclosure of conflicts of interest. The decision notice serves as a timely reminder to all directors, both executive and nonexecutive, to ensure that they disclose such interests - if there is any doubt, the clear message is to disclose.

BACKGROUND

Ms. Burns was an "experienced professional in the UK investment industry" and the chief executive of her own investment consultancy business. In 2006, having provided some consultancy advice to an investment manager (the "Investment Manager"), she asked the Investment Manager for the opportunity to turn her proposal into a UK business; however, the Investment Manager declined to pursue this proposal.

By 2008 the Investment Manager had decided to enter the UK market and Ms. Burns submitted a formal proposal outlining the work which she could perform for the Investment Manager which included "gathering" assets in the institutional sector and providing non-executive services.

Ms. Burns was appointed a non-executive director and approved to perform the CF2 role of Marine and General Mutual Life Assurance Society ("MGM") in January 2010 and of Teachers Provident Society ("Teachers") in May 2010. She was chair of each society's investment committee.

MGM

Following her appointment as a non-executive director, Ms. Burns informed a number of her contacts at the Investment Manager of her new role and re-sent them her 2008 proposal. At her first MGM board meeting, Ms. Burns recommended that the board should consider using the Investment Manager to manage a portfolio of assets. Although the MGM board was aware that Ms. Burns had done a consulting project for the Investment Manager in the past, she did not disclose that she was seeking consulting work from the Investment Manager. In fact, in early 2009, she had told the MGM CEO that there was no prospect of her working with the Investment Manager. However, in subsequent emails with the Investment Manager, Ms. Burns sought to perform consultancy work for the Investment Manager and to serve as a non-executive director for the Investment Manager's Dublin funds.

In September 2009, MGM's investment committee approved the recommendation to place a £350 million mandate with the Investment Manager.

Teachers

Following her appointment as a non-executive director, Ms. Burns recommended that the Investment Manager be included in the tender process which Teachers was running to select a new investment manager. By November 2010, Teachers considered the Investment Manager to be the preferred candidate for the investment mandate of c.£750m. However, on 5 November, before the Investment Manager made its tender presentation, Ms. Burns sent an email to the Investment Manager. The Investment Manager considered the email to be a request for payment and a non-executive director role in return for Ms. Burns using her position at MGM and Teachers to facilitate the placement of investment mandates at those firms with the Investment Manager. The Investment Manager rejected this request and decided to withdraw from the tender process.

Again, the Teachers board was aware that Ms. Burns had done consultancy work for the Investment Manager in the past, but at no point did she disclose that she was seeking work from the Investment Manager.

In her representations, Ms. Burns had argued, amongst other things, that no discloseable interest had crystallised since there was "no traction" in her discussions with the Investment Manager and her approaches were no more than "feelers". She accepted that the 5 November email was poorly worded but she claimed that it was no more than an attempt to resurrect or re-invigorate the discussions for future work set out in her 2008 proposal.

BREACHES

The FSA concluded that Ms. Burns had:

  • failed to act with integrity in breach of Statement of Principle 1 by failing to disclose her conflicts of interest to MGM and to Teachers and by attempting to use her fiduciary position as a non-executive director of both MGM and Teachers to benefit herself;
  • disregarded her duties under the relevant companies legislation2, articles of association and conflicts documentation to declare her interest in obtaining work for the Investment Manager; and
  • breached her fiduciary position of trust when she had told MGM's CEO that she had no prospect of working with the Investment Manager at a time when she was trying to obtain work from it.

SANCTION

The FSA imposed a prohibition order on Ms. Burns banning her from carrying out any function in relation to any regulated activity.

It also imposed a fine of £154,800. Since the relevant conduct took place both before and after 6 March 2010 (when the FSA introduced a new penalty regime), the fine was calculated in two parts. Under the old regime, a figure of £75,000 was determined to be the appropriate sum. Under the new regime, having identified Ms. Burns' relevant income (£66,500), the FSA considered the seriousness of the breach and determined that this was a level 4 (out of 5) case – meaning the appropriate percentage to apply to the income figure was 30%. The resulting figure (£19,950) was deemed too small to act as a deterrent and was adjusted upwards by a factor of 4. In a stark warning to others, the FSA noted that the multiple may be higher for those not heeding the lessons of this notice.

COMMENTS

Conflicts of interest

The notice provides a salutary lesson of the importance of identifying conflicts of interest and making appropriate disclosure of them. This is particularly true of nonexecutive directors who "are more likely to have a portfolio of appointments and are likely to find themselves having to manage conflicts of interest more frequently than their fellow directors."3

The FSA rejected Ms. Burns' argument that no discloseable interest had crystallised because the discussions were at a preliminary stage. It concluded that her interest in the discussions was still very real and substantial. The FSA also rejected the suggestion that there was a difference between an actual and potential conflict adopting the Upper Tribunal's analysis in First Financial Advisers Ltd v the FSA4:

" If the use of "potential" is intended to denote a circumstance where a person may become entitled to receive benefit from an interest that could be in conflict with a duty, but at the material time there has been no such receipt, then that in our judgment is a real and present conflict, notwithstanding that the benefit has not crystallised, or indeed may never do so."

Ms. Burns' argument that, in practice, difficult judgement calls were required to be made was not accepted not least because there was no evidence that she had discussed her position with anyone else.

The FSA's view is clear: if there is any doubt at all, it is better to disclose: "A disclosure gives the other person a choice. No disclosure denies that person the opportunity of coming to a view on a matter which is of interest to them." 5

Lack of integrity

Although Ms. Burns had not acted deliberately or dishonestly, the FSA concluded that she lacked integrity. This may seem surprising, given that honesty is a concept usually associated with integrity. Indeed, all the examples of conduct which does not comply with Statement of Principle 1 cited in APER 4.1 refer to deliberate or dishonest conduct (including the deliberate failure to disclose the existence of a conflict of interest in connection with dealings with a client). Most of the cases involving a breach of Principle 1 involve deliberate and intentional misconduct but there are cases where individuals have been found to lack integrity on the basis of reckless conduct. For example, in 2009, the Tribunal found Milan Vukelic lacked integrity "in that he must have turned a blind eye to the obvious". He was reckless rather then negligent because he had reason to believe that the transaction in which he was involved was improper but it appears from a final notice issued to James Shanks6 that negligence (in that case, failing to check information in circumstances where it would have been easy to do so) was sufficient to ground a finding of lack of integrity.

Publication of the decision notice

Ms. Burns applied unsuccessfully to the Upper Tribunal for an order7, amongst other things, prohibiting publication of the decision notice.

In its judgment, the Tribunal followed the approach which it had set out in Arch Financial Products and Others v FSA8. It stated that there is a presumption9 that publicity will be the norm. The exercise of the power to prohibit publication is a matter of judicial discretion which should be exercised taking into account all relevant factors and giving effect to the overriding objective that requires the Tribunal to deal with cases fairly and justly. This involves a balancing exercise but there is a strong presumption in favour of open justice which may be rebutted by "cogent evidence" of a "disproportionate level of damage".

Ms. Burns argued that if the decision notice was published it would destroy her livelihood. Whilst the Tribunal accepted that destruction or serious damage to livelihood is at a higher level than embarrassment or reputational damage, some damage is to be tolerated because of the importance of the open justice principle. Publication should be prohibited where the impact of publication on the individual is so severe that it outweighs that principle. It was necessary to establish that there was a serious likelihood of destruction or damage to livelihood occurring. In relation to Ms. Burns, the Tribunal found that:

  • There was a significant possibility, but not a serious likelihood, that Ms Burns' one client would terminate its contract if it learned of the decision notice but there was also a significant possibility, given the current level of activity under the contract, that the client would terminate the contract in any event.
  • There was no certainty that Ms. Burns regardless of publication would be in a position to secure other work over the next year.
  • In the worst case scenario, if publication took place, the client may terminate its contract with her but she would not be destitute as she had other assets to fall back on.
  • If Ms. Burns' reference to the Upper Tribunal was successful, there would be a reasonable prospect of her being considered for further work from previous clients and contacts. Consequently, the overall result would be that her consultancy business would be put on hold while she pursued the reference.
  • There are no other individuals, such as employees, whose position would be adversely affected by publication.

Accordingly, the Tribunal concluded that any damage to Ms. Burns' livelihood caused by publication was not so severe that it outweighed the public interest in the principle of open justice. However, the Tribunal did give Ms. Burns the opportunity of discussing the proceedings against her with her existing clients and contacts as a way of minimising the impact of publication. The Tribunal also directed the FCA to make clear when it published the decision notice that it was subject to challenge and its findings were provisional.

Footnotes

1 An approved person must act with integrity in carrying out his controlled function.

2 In relation to MGM, section 177 of the Companies Act 2006 and in relation to Teachers, section 63 of the Building Societies Act 1986 which is extended to the Friendly Societies Act 1992.

3 FCA press release dated 24 May 2013

4 FS/2010/0038

5 Paragraph 7.12

6 Final notice dated 18 December 2009

7 Under Rule 14(1) of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008

8 FS/2012/20

9 Under section 391 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions