content
menu
navigation
extras

Lexis^® Middle East

QFC QFC Case No. 002/2014

Qatar Financial Centre Regulatory Authority v Recardo

Type

Case

Court

Qatar Financial Centre - Qatar Financial Centre, Civil and Commercial Court, First Instance Circuit

Jurisdiction

Qatar Financial Centre

Taxonomy

Regulation & Offences, General Banking & Finance Law

Copyright

LexisNexis

Decision date

3 Mar 2015

Hearing/Judgment date

3 March 2015

Panel

Rajah, Al-Sayed and Kirkham JJ

Catchwords

Financial Services – Regulation – Financial penalty – Claimant regulator finding defendant being in breach of regulations – Claimant imposing financial penalty – Defendant failing to make payment – Claimant stating inability to pay penalty by deadline – Claimant issuing proceedings seeking recovery of outstanding penalty – Defendant failing to serve defence – Claimant applying for summary judgment – Defendant failing to respond to application – Whether court should grant summary judgment on claim

Copyright © 2024 LexisNexis. All rights reserved.

Background

Table of Contents

Background
The claimant was established under art 8 of the QFC Law No. 7/2005 as the independent financial regulator of the Qatar Financial Centre (QFC). The defendant had been the chief executive officer of a firm authorised by the claimant to carry on certain activities in or from the QFC. The claimant gave the defendant a notice under art 71 of the QFC Financial Services Regulations (FSR) that the claimant had found that the defendant had committed contraventions of relevant requirements contrary to art 84 of the FSR. Disciplinary action was taken by the claimant against the defendant that resulted in the imposition of a financial penalty of US$70,000 under art 59 of the FSR and a prohibition order pursuant to art 62 of the FSR. The defendant did not exercise his appeal rights. Accordingly, the claimant sent him an invoice for US$70,000 which was payable immediately. Payment was not forthcoming. The claimant made further demands for payment to which the defendant replied that he was in no position to make payment prior to the deadline that had been imposed and a subsequent offer, which was declined, to make payment by instalments. The claimant commenced proceedings seeking orders that the defendant had failed to pay the sum of US$70,000 and that that sum was due as a debt. The defendant failed to serve any defence. The claimant then applied for summary judgment. The defendant did not respond to that application. The claimant confirmed that service of the claim form, the application for summary judgment and all supporting documentation had been made in accordance with art 18.3.5 of the QFC Civil and Commercial Court Regulations and Procedural Rules.
Disposition
The claimant’s application for summary judgment on the claim was allowed.
Holding
The defendant had not challenged, or appealed, the decision to impose the financial penalty upon him. Accordingly, the financial penalty had become due to be paid by him to the claimant. The claimant had duly served the claim, the application for summary judgment and all supporting documents. The defendant had filed no defence to either the claim or the application for summary judgment. He had not denied his liability in respect of the financial penalty; to the contrary, he had, in correspondence, tacitly acknowledged his liability for the sum claimed. In all the circumstances, the claimant was entitled to judgment and for orders to be made as sought (see [11]-[14] of the judgment).
Legislation referred to in judgment
Appearances
Law reporter