Concurrent Proceedings are not Inherently Unfair

In R (on the application of Land & Ors) v Executive Council of the Joint†Disciplinary Scheme[2002] EWHC 2086 the Administrative Court†considered whether the existence of concurrent proceedings gives rise†to an inherent unfairness that the court should take into account when†determining an application for a stay of disciplinary proceedings.

An application was made by Ernst & Young†(E&Y) seeking an order staying the†investigation by the Executive Council of the†Joint Disciplinary Scheme (JDS) into E&Y's†role as auditor of Equitable Life Assurance†Society and subsidiaries (Equitable) until†after the completion of civil proceedings†brought by Equitable against E&Y. The†application was made on the ground that the†continuation of the investigation would give†rise to a serious risk of prejudice to E&Y.†The prejudice alleged was in relation to the†litigation, the JDS investigation and any†subsequent disciplinary tribunal proceedings,†and the private and professional lives of the†E&Y partners and personnel who were†involved in the firm's audits and regulatory†work for Equitable.

Mr Justice Stanley Burton referred to the†general principles applicable to an†application for a stay of...