Financial services and markets tribunal orders that costs of successful challenge to enforcement action for market abuse be paid by FSA

Purpose - To report and comment on the case Paul Davidson, Ashley Tatham v. The Financial Services Authority. Design/methodology/approach - Outlines the facts and explains the decision reached. Findings - The Tribunal ruled that the decision of the Financial Services Authority (FSA) which was the subject of the references was unreasonable and it directed that the FSA pay the costs or expenses incurred by the applicants in connection with the proceedings. Originality/value - With the costs incurred by the applicants being considerable, the paper offers the following warning: challenges to FSA enforcement action before the Tribunal do not come cheap and if successful applicants before the Tribunal then face a costs burden too their victories will often seem somewhat pyrrhic and the incentives for a meaningful level of challenge to FSA enforcement action, with the attendant public and independent airing of what can be vital legal issues for others too, becomes weakened.