Lewis Nedas Law Director and Regulatory Specialist Ian Coupland and Associate Solicitor Adam Creasey have achieved an outstanding result on behalf of an individual who was the subject of Company Director Disqualification Proceedings brought by the Official Receiver on the direction of the Secretary of State.

The case concerned an international Collective Investment Scheme fraud with investor losses totalling approximately £5.5 million.  The disqualification proceedings resulted from the winding up the fraudulent company, following which the Official Receiver then sought to disqualify the individuals concerned in running the scheme for a  period of 12 years under the Company Director Disqualification Act 1996.   

Our client had been accused of acting as a Director and/or Shadow Director of the fraudulent company. The Official Receiver’s Solicitors argued that our client caused or allowed the fraudulent company to make misrepresentations to obtain and/or misappropriate funds in excess of £2 million from members of the public. The evidence in support was extensive and was contained in 6 boxes. The consequences for our client of losing would have been substantial because  not only would it have resulted in him not being able to carry on as a Director in his current business, but there would also have been a substantial costs order award against him, and also potential criminal proceedings with the real risk of a custodial sentence.    

Ian and Adam working with specialist regulatory barrister Jeremy Barnett, Head of Regulatory Law at St Paul’s Chambers, Leeds, successfully presented counter-arguments to the Official Receiver’s Solicitors in our client’s witness statement in reply. This involved a detailed analysis of the case and our client’s actions.  Our client’s witness statement exceeded 15,000 words and included multiple exhibits, and after considering our client’s evidence with their specialist  Counsel, the Official Receiver’s Solicitors accepted our client’s position.  We then successfully negotiated the discontinuance of the case against our client and the recovery of his costs.