Skip to main content

Cases Filed Before the Regulatory Tribunal - 2023

pattern

5 Cases

There were 5 cases filed before the Regulatory Tribunal in 2023. The Tribunal issued 4 decisions, and these included financial regulatory matters and tax.

Regulatory Tribunal

Jean-Marc Mantegani v Qatar Financial Centre Regulatory Authority [2023] QIC (RT) 1 and Patrick Baeriswyl v Qatar Financial Centre Regulatory Authority [2023] QIC (RT) 2

In two similar cases – Jean-Marc Mantegani v Qatar Financial Centre Regulatory Authority [2023] QIC (RT) 1 and Patrick Baeriswyl v Qatar Financial Centre Regulatory Authority [2023] QIC (RT) 2 – the Regulatory Tribunal (Sir William Blair, Chairman, and Justices Sean Hagan and Dr Muna Al-Marzouqi) dismissed appeals from two Appellants who had received decisions from the Regulatory Authority imposing financial penalties and prohibitions for contraventions of a number of QFC anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing rules. REGULATORY TRIBUNAL

Rudolfs Veiss v Qatar Financial Centre Regulatory Authority [2023] QIC (RT) 3

In Rudolfs Veiss v Qatar Financial Centre Regulatory Authority [2023] QIC (RT) 3, the Regulatory Tribunal (Sir William Blair, Chairman, and Justices Edwin Glasgow CBE KC and Dr Muna Al-Marzouqi) partially upheld a decision to impose a 5-year prohibition and a financial penalty – broadly – for, inter alia, alleged breaches of a Restriction Period in relation to onboarding of new customers, amending dates on documentation, and various rule breaches. The Tribunal found that not all of the allegations were made out and reduced the financial penalty but left the 5-year prohibition in place. REGULATORY TRIBUNAL

Infinity Solutions LLC v Qatar Financial Centre Authority [2023] QIC (RT) 4

Infinity Solutions LLC v Qatar Financial Centre Authority [2023] QIC (RT) 4 (Justices Laurence Li SC, Sean Hagan and Yongjian Zhang) concerned the interpretation of the QFC Tax Regulations 2020 and, specifically, eligibility for the Concessionary Rate under article 88(2). The Regulatory Tribunal upheld the Respondent’s Decision that the Appellant did not qualify as a “Qatar Owned QFC Entity” for these purposes. REGULATORY

pattern