(1) Subsections (2) to (4) apply if an investigator considers that any person (“A”) is or may be able to give information which is or may be relevant to the investigation.
(2)The investigator may require A—
(a)to attend before him at a specified time and place and answer questions; or
(b)otherwise to provide such information as he may require for the purposes of the investigation.
(3)The investigator may also require A to produce at a specified time and place any specified documents or documents of a specified description which appear to the investigator to relate to any matter relevant to the investigation.
(4)The investigator may also otherwise require A to give him all assistance in connection with the investigation which A is reasonably able to give.
(5) “Investigator” means a person appointed under subsection (3) of
section 168 (as a result of subsection (2)
of that section).
Cases considering section 173 (6)
[2019] EWHC 1611 (Ch) · 21 June 2019Interprets
Section 173 confers powers to require information. The court held that those powers do not require the authority to pay the recipient’s expenses, subject to proportionality constraints under s 3B(1)(b) (see paras [20], [30]).
Section 173(2)(b) formed the statutory basis for the investigator’s requirement that specified information be provided. The court treated the requirement as one imposed by an investigator acting on behalf of the FCA (see para [3]).
Section 173(3) was relied on as part of the statutory basis for the investigator’s information requirement. The requirement was treated as imposed in the course of an investigation conducted on behalf of the FCA (see para [3]).
Section 173(4) supplied the statutory basis for requiring assistance in addition to specified information. The court treated the October requirement as a valid Part XI requirement for the purposes of s 177 (see para [3]).
[2011] UKSC 1 · 19 January 2011
The provision was relied on unsuccessfully as a possible English offence corresponding to the Jersey offence. The failure to establish correspondence led to dismissal of the first complaint on its merits (see paras [37]-[41]).
[2010] UKSC 39 · 28 July 2010Limits
The information, document and assistance powers did not imply an exhaustive correspondence between the Authority’s investigative and prosecutorial powers. (see para [30])
What each judgment says about section 173 is in the case-law panel in the full Act.
336.This section establishes wider powers for investigators appointed to investigate possible insider dealing, market abuse, misleading statements and practices or a breach of the general or the promotional prohibitions under sections 19, 21 or 238. Because these are liable to focus, at least initially, on market circumstances rather than the conduct or circumstances of any particular person, or the activities of persons unknown, there is no requirement to notify a particular person as the subject of the investigation. So the concept of connectedness does not apply. The investigator can require any person to attend and answer questions, or to supply information or documents, so long as the investigator considers that they may be able to give information relevant to the investigation.