• GL
Choose your location?
  • Global Global
  • Australian flag Australia
  • French flag France
  • German flag Germany
  • Irish flag Ireland
  • Italian flag Italy
  • Polish flag Poland
  • Qatar flag Qatar
  • Spanish flag Spain
  • UAE flag UAE
  • UK flag UK

Storing up trouble – analysing the Court of Appeal's decision in Carey Pensions

15 April 2021
The latest saga relating to unregulated introducers has unfolded with the Court of Appeal overturning the first instance judgment in Carey. The implications of this decision could be far reaching for firms that deal with unauthorised introducers or are themselves unauthorised.
In a total reverse of the first instance decision, the Court of Appeal has issued its decision in Carey (Adams v Options UK Personal Pensions LLP). 

We discuss in this update the relevance of the decision to the wealth management market as a whole, including input from our professional indemnity insurance litigation colleagues who provide additional practical tips based on issues they have seen.  We also refer back to our previous 'long read' article, from our annual review on the Carey case and the similar issues under appeal in the Avacade case.

In our view, this decision could affect any firm that deals with unregulated introducers – particularly, in 'execution only' or 'advice-lite' propositions. It is also a hammer blow to the 'execution only' SIPP market and the way parts of that market previously operated. 

Frustratingly, there are still a number of highly relevant considerations which the Court did not address, whether by choice or because of the way the case was pleaded. We hope the Avacade appeal, which is due to be heard this summer, will cover these points. 

download our full article on Carey here

read our 2020 wealth management review

Further Reading