Page 78 - Annual Report 2020
P. 78
/ 73 QF CR A ANNU AL REP OR T 2020
Takaful International Company B.S.C International Financial Services QFC court judgments QFC Regulatory Tribunal decisions
for serious regulatory beaches and (Qatar) LLC for its failure to comply
The Regulatory Authority was party to seven proceedings Two decisions of the Regulatory Authority were appealed
failure to treat its customers fairly with its regulatory obligations
in the QFC Civil and Commercial Court in 2020, including: to the QFC Regulatory Tribunal and the Tribunal
upheld both decisions of the Regulatory Authority:
In September 2020, the Regulatory Authority imposed In April, September and October 2020, the Regulatory • Qatar Financial Centre Regulatory Authority v
a financial penalty of QAR 728,000 on insurer, Takaful Authority issued International Financial Services (Qatar) First Abu Dhabi Bank P.J.S.C. – Case No 11 of 2019 • Horizon Crescent Wealth LLC v Qatar Financial Centre
International Company B.S.C (Takaful) for providing LLC (IFSQ) with supervisory notices for its failure to (27 February 2020) Regulatory Authority - Case Nos 2 and 4 of 2019
false and misleading information to the Regulatory comply with the Regulatory Authority’s regulatory • Qatar Financial Centre Regulatory Authority v First Abu (19 March 2020)
Authority, failing to treat customers fairly and failing obligations in a satisfactory manner. The notices Dhabi Bank PJSC - Case No 2 of 2019 (29 July 2020) • Horizon Crescent Wealth LLC v Qatar Financial
to deal with the Regulatory Authority in an open and prohibited IFSQ from engaging in business or providing • Ileana Mercedes D’Lacoste Agudelo and Eniluz Jhoana Centre Regulatory Authority – Case No 2 of 2019
cooperative manner. Takaful was also required to services to new customers or any new business or Gonzalez Aponte v Horizon Crescent Wealth LLC and (12 July 2020)
pay the costs of the investigation of QAR 94,044. additional services for existing customers. The Notices Others - Case Nos 6 and 7 of 2018 (17 March 2020) • David Russell v Qatar Financial Centre Regulatory
also required IFSQ to rectify various rule breaches. • Horizon Crescent Wealth LLC v QFCRA and QFCA – Authority - Case No 4 of 2020 (10 August 2020)
Case Nos 5 and 6 of 2020 (on appeal from Case Nos 2
Settlement with GlobeMed Qatar LLC
and 4 of 2019) (9 June 2020)
Legal action in New York to Customer Protection: The Customer
The Regulatory Authority agreed to a settlement • Ms Ileana Mercedes D’Lacoste Agudelo and Ms Eniluz
enforce judgment against First Jhoana Gonzalez Aponte v Horizon Crescent Wealth Dispute Resolution Scheme
with GlobeMed Qatar LLC, a non-regulated third-
Abu Dhabi Bank P.J.S.C LLC and Others and Qatar Financial Centre Regulatory
party administrator. The investigation revealed
Authority – Case Nos 6 and 7 of 2018 An internal complaints-handling framework is a
that during the period April 2017 to December
In November 2020, the Regulatory Authority (14 September 2020) requirement for authorised firms in the QFC. Where
2019, GlobeMed represented in certain documents
commenced legal proceedings in New York to • Qatar Financial Centre Regulatory Authority v Horizon customer complaints are not satisfactorily resolved by a
that it provided insurance mediation services in
compel First Abu Dhabi Bank P.J.S.C (FAB) to pay a Crescent Wealth LLC, Case No 4 of 2020 firm’s internal framework, customers can seek redress
or from the QFC when it was not authorised to do
court ordered judgment debt in the amount of QAR (20 September 2020) through an external independent adjudication process,
so, potentially leading to misunderstandings as to
200,000,000. The action was filed in New York to the Customer Dispute Resolution Scheme (CDRS). The
the services offered by GlobeMed. As part of the
recover the amount due to the Regulatory Authority The Court found in favour of the Regulatory Authority CDRS has been in operation since 2014 and has resulted
settlement GlobeMed agreed to pay the costs and
from assets held by FAB in New York. FAB failed to in all proceedings. in a number of successful outcomes for customers.
expenses of the investigation of QAR 54,600.
make payment against the final judgment rendered
by the QFC Civil and Commercial Court, thereby
requiring the Regulatory Authority to take steps to
enforce the court’s judgment under well-recognised
measures for international enforcement of money
judgments. The action arises from FAB’s obstruction of
an investigation conducted by the Regulatory Authority
and the lack of integrity demonstrated by FAB in its
conduct as a firm conducting business in the QFC.
T ABLE OF C ONTENT S
