Press Release – Zakery Khub Solicitors: Litigation & Dispute Resolution

RE: FCA v 24HR Trading Academy Limited and MR M F Maricar – Neutral Citation:
[2021] EWHC 648 (Ch).

Fast-evolving Crypto market and FX Trading – (such as ‘futures contracts’, ‘contract for
difference’ and ‘option’ and ‘securities’) is it a Criminal Offence to introduce?
‘Arranging’, ‘selling’ or ‘advising’, which is not always obvious to an untrained
introducer/promoter, could land them in contravention of FSMA 2000 and lead to a possible
criminal offence.

Having been heavily involved in the High Court’s decision in Avacade as reported by
Law360, FTAdviser, Bloomberg, and International Advisor, etc., and more recently in at the
Court of Appeal in early July 2021, we highlighted the implications of being an unregulated
introducer and the danger of inducing UK Consumers to trade in Cryptocurrency derivatives
e.g. CFDs on FX-trading platforms.

Relying on Avacde, the FCA sued Mr Maricar personally. He mistakenly assumed that he
was exempt from introducing consumers to AvaTrade and VantageFX, but little did he know
that he would be held personally liable (albeit traded through his limited company) for
£530,695.00 plus interest and costs, together with an injunction against his company
preventing it from continuing to transmit trading signals. The High Court found that
transmitting trading signals amounted to ‘advice’, and therefore a breach of FSMA 2000 –
see FCA v 24HR Trading Academy Limited and MR M F Maricar – Neutral Citation
[2021] EWHC 648 (Ch).

It is clear that, having considered the effect of the above judgment, all unregulated
(not regulated by the FCA) must exercise extreme caution and seek
independent legal advice.

For a full litigation risk assessment of your Crypto derivatives (such as CFDs), FX-trading,
financial services introducer business, please visit email:

[email protected]

The End
22 July 2021


The analysis of Adams and Avacade has now resulted in two different decisions by the Court of Appeal. For precise details of the difference, please refer to the records of our analysis of Adams and Avacade as presented to the Court of Appeal on 7 th and 8 th July 2021.