Claire Cross comments on the ‘Name and Shame’ test case ruling that could embolden FCA

Lawyers foresee a possible increase in instances where the Financial Conduct Authority names and shames companies under investigation, following a test case in the High Court.

The High Court rejected the anonymised company’s judicial review application, finding that the FCA’s decision-making process and outcome in the case were reasonable in taking consumer protection into account. Judge Michael Fordham supported the regulator’s decision to name and shame that company under exceptional circumstances, though he said that some elements lacked strong reasoning.

Ensuring the right information is available to consumers is a priority in the FCA’s 2025-2030 strategy published in March. As lawyers pointed out, however, in relevant cases the FCA must balance the risk of damage from naming the company under investigation against consumer harm.

In the LAW360 article, Partner, Claire Cross noted “Despite this case seeming at first blush to suggest that consumer protection is a trump card, it will not always be so.”

There is no doubt, however, that consumer protection swung the decision on the judicial review in this particular case. The Court of Appeal had not received an appeal application from the company by the deadline, and lawyers now expect the FCA to name the business.

You can read the full article here.