(1) Paul Randall Pybus (2) Adjure Global Limited v. Guernsey Financial Services Commission [2025] GRC 082

Summary

This is a Royal Court of Guernsey judgment (Ordinary Division) deciding an appeal by Paul Randall Pybus and Adjure Global Limited (a licensed fiduciary and insurance manager, now in liquidation) against a GFSC enforcement decision. The Senior Decision Maker (SDM) had imposed a £150,000 financial penalty and a 10 year prohibition order on Mr Pybus, disapplied the six directorships exemption under the 2020 Fiduciaries Law for 10 years, imposed a £300,000 penalty on Adjure Global Limited, and directed a public statement against both. The appeal challenged the decision on grounds including breach of Article 6 (independence/impartiality), prejudgment, failure to disclose documents, failure to permit cross examination, errors of law, disproportionality, and material factual/procedural errors.

• Article 6 and independence grounds: The Royal Court rejected the argument that the GFSC enforcement regime (investigator, prosecutor and decision maker in one body) breaches Article 6 fair trial rights, following the Court of Appeal's reasoning in Domaille that the Royal Court's appellate review provides sufficient safeguards.
• Probity and integrity findings set aside: The Court found the SDM's findings that Mr Pybus and AGL acted with a lack of probity and integrity were flawed and set aside that part of the Decision.
• Other findings confirmed: The remainder of the SDM's findings and conclusions were held to be reasonable and proportionate and the Decision is confirmed in those respects.
• Sanctions not adjudicated: Because the level of sanctions and penalties was closely tied to the flawed probity and integrity findings, the Court did not rule on the appeal against the sanctions themselves.
• Remittal: Exercising its power under section 106(6)(a) of the Enforcement Law, the Court remitted the matter to the GFSC, directing that the probity and integrity findings be re-determined by a new SDM, with sanctions and penalties then re-determined in light of that outcome.

The judgment is primarily of precedential and case specific interest: it clarifies the limits of Article 6 challenges to the GFSC's enforcement structure and confirms that flawed probity findings can be remitted for redetermination without automatically overturning an entire enforcement decision. It does not impose new general rules on the wider regulated population.

Key obligations

• The GFSC must re-determine, before a newly appointed Senior Decision Maker, the findings relating to lack of probity and integrity against Mr Pybus and Adjure Global Limited.
• Following that re-determination, the GFSC must re-determine the sanctions and penalties applicable to the Appellants in light of the revised probity/integrity findings.

Applies to

fiduciary licensees, insurance managers, company directors, trust service providers, company administration businesses