Court of Appeal, Criminal Division

Published June 23, 2009

Regina v McQuoid

Before Lord Judge, Lord Chief Justice, Mr Justice Collins and Mr Justice Owen

Judgment June 10, 2009

Deliberate insider dealing was a species of fraud for which prosecution, rather than regulatory proceedings, would often be more appropriate.

The criminality of those who sought to make a profit out of the knowledge and trust reposed in them in relation to takeover arrangements was not reduced merely because they were individuals of good character.

The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, so stated in dismissing an appeal by Christopher McQuoid against an eight-month prison sentence imposed by Judge Testar at Southwark Crown Court on March 30, 2009, following his conviction for insider dealing, contrary to section 52(1) of the Criminal Justice Act 1993.

Section 52 of the 1993 Act provides: “(1) An individual who has information as an insider is guilty of insider dealing if ... he deals in securities that are price-affected securities in relation to the information.

“(2) An individual who has information as an insider is also guilty of insider dealing if - (a) he encourages another person to deal in securities that are ... price-affected securities in relation to the information ...; or (b) he discloses the information, otherwise that in the proper performance of the functions of his employment, office or profession, to another person.”

Mr Jonathan Caplan, QC and Mr Gary Summers for the appellant; Mr Michael Bowes, QC, for the prosecution.

THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE, giving the judgment of the court, said that the appellant was a solicitor and former general counsel of TTP Communications plc.

Times Recommends

• BGC 'set aside £40m to lure Tullett brokers'
• Legal aid review to ensure value
• Fears as 21 magistrates' courts face closure