Shah vs HSBC – the saga continues

I could kiss both Mr Shah and the senior management of HSBC, I really could.  This case has been so interesting to follow, and generated so much discussion during my training sessions and workshops – and still it continues.  In the latest development, Mr Shah is appealing against the original decision – that HSBC did what the law required them to do, not perfectly, but well enough to satisfy the court – and so HSBC has been required to submit its SARs (internal and external) to the court.  When it did so, it redacted some details – specifically, the names of all employees involved except that of their MLRO, Michael Wigley, on the basis that “the identities of any other employees are both irrelevant and/or should not be disclosed for reasons of public interest immunity.”  In a hearing on 24 June 2011, the Hon Mr Justice Coulson was asked to decide on the matter.

I know I’m a bit strange when it comes to matters money laundering, but I found the decision a totally riveting and compelling read.  Back and forth it went – no to redaction, yes to confidentiality – until a decision was reached.  It’s too exciting, and you’ll have to read it yourself:  For my part, I’m adding HHJ Coulson to my Christmas card list.

This entry was posted in Legislation and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.