Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free
Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.
Crispin Odey has partly fought off an attempt by the UK’s financial regulator to block chunks of his legal challenge against his ban from working in the City of London, days before the former hedge fund boss is due to kick off a high-profile appeal.
A judge has allowed Odey to present specific claims of regulatory over-reach at a trial in London next month. Odey can argue that the Financial Conduct Authority’s supervision division targeted the financier as part of an “animus” against him.
However, in a nuanced pre-trial judgment seen by the FT, the judge has accepted the FCA’s arguments to throw out some aspects of his case. These include his contention that the regulator’s “non-financial misconduct agenda” improperly influenced its “statement of case” against him.
Odey Asset Management collapsed in 2023 after the FT reported that a number of women had accused him of sexual misconduct. The financier strenuously denies the allegations and has brought a libel claim against the FT over its reporting.
The FCA banned him from financial services and fined him £1.8mn last year, not over the misconduct claims themselves but over an alleged “lack of integrity” in how he responded to them by twice firing the executive committee that was investigating his alleged behaviour.
Odey, 67, is challenging the FCA at the Upper Tribunal, which hears appeals to FCA decisions, and the case is due to go to trial on March 9.
The hedge fund founder’s lawyers argued in court documents that the FCA was under “political pressure” before it banned him and that its actions contributed to the demise of OAM.
Lawyers for the regulator accused him at a pretrial hearing earlier this month of advancing “irrelevant” theories unsupported by evidence, and called on the judge to strike out six parts of his case.
Before the hearing began, Odey withdrew two of his claims. One of these referred to comments the FCA had made to parliament about its investigation into the hedge fund boss, which he had said showed its determination to take action against him.
The second withdrawn claim was what the judge said were “mistaken assertions” that the FCA had changed the scope of its investigation shortly after OAM confirmed that he had met the regulator’s “fit and proper” requirements.
In his ruling, Judge Rupert Jones granted the FCA’s application to strike out two parts of Odey’s legal claim but refused it in respect of all others, preserving important aspects of his appeal.
It means Odey will be permitted to argue at his upcoming appeal that the financial sector faced “general uncertainty” around the FCA’s approach to tackling non-financial misconduct, which includes harassment, bullying and discrimination.
The FCA declined to comment. A lawyer for Odey did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
