(LlvtN)

FORM 14.7 Rule14.7(2)

Form of citation in petition

CITATION

Edinburgh,the SiXTeEuT !1 day of October,2009.

To: StephenAntonia Farley, 15aDublin Street,Edinburgh,EH1 3PG.

IN HER MAJESTY'S NAME AND AUTHORITY, and in the name and authorityof Lord
Kinclaven,I, ALAil tujAf-g€\-u oMessenger-At-Arms, 19 Dublin StreetLane South,
Edinburgh,EHI 3PX, serve the attachedpetition and interlocutorof the court on you.

The interlocutorrequiresyou, if so advised,to lodge answersto the petition and desireand

requireyou to pay due respectand obedienceto the Interim Interdict therebygranted.

If you intend to lodge answersto the petition you must lodge them at the Office of Court,
Court of Session,2 ParliamentSquare,EdinburghEHl IRQ within [21] daysafter the dateof
serviceon you of the petition. The dateof serviceis the date statedat the top of this citation
unlessservicehas beenby post in which casethe dateof serviceis the day after that date.

ThisI do in thepresence
of t)sll€f piSU,L , 19 Dublin StreetLane South,
Edinburgh, EHl 3PX,Witness.

Messenger-At-Arms
l9 Dublin StreetLaneSouth
Edinburgh
EHl 3PX
0 1 3 15 5 70 1 0 0

lnstructedBy: McGrigors LLP, PrincesExchange,1 Earl Grey Street,Edinburgh,EH3 9AQ,

0r3r 777 7000,HLR/MFM/JMH/FI0062.00001 1

IF YOU ARE UNCERTAIN ABOUT THE EFFECT OF THIS CITATION, you should
consulta solicitor,CitizensAdviceBureauor otherlocaladviceagencyor adviser
immediately.

73869t COS\FI4 7.FRM FORMOF CITATIONPETITION

WALKER LOVE
W: www.walkerlove.co.uk Messenqers-at-Artns Sheriff Officers ,\-.^':9
f\
E:admin-dept@walkerlove.co.uk
 Ce-rh["o,)' copJ l*utae./fo r--

EDNBLRGFtSfrofcoi
A TRUECOPY
CERTIFY

co'\
CLERKOF SESSION
ASSISTANT f-,uoci?oosq

TIIE FINANCIAL SERVICES AUTHORITY a company limite<i by guaratrteeand having its

principal place of businessat 25 The North Colonnade,Canary-Wharf, L,ondon,El4 5HS

Petitioner

15October2009 Lord Kinclaven

R.Dunlop

The LordOrdinary,havingheardCounselon the unopposed motionof the

Petitioners,Allowsthe Minuteof Amendment for the PetitionersNo' 9 of
Process to be received;Allows the to
Petition be amended in terms of said
Minuteof Amendm ent;AelinterimInterdictsthe Second Respondent, Stephen
AntoniaFarley,fromcarryingon or purpofting to carryon, whetherdirectlyor
indirectlyand whetherby his seruants,agentsor otherwise,a regulated
activityin contraventionof s. 19 of the Financial Servicesand MarketsAct
2000 by the unlawfulacceptingof depositswithin the meaningof the
Financial Servicesand MarketsAct 2000 (Regulated Activities)Order2001
andDecerns; Grantswarrant to serve a copy of the as nowamended
Petition
on the SecondNamedRespondent, viz.Stephen AntoniaFarley togetherwith
on a periodof noticeof twenty
a copyof this interlocutor one days;Appoints
the Solicitorfor the Petitioners to lodgea ceftificateof executionof such
servicein orocess.
bn r- 14
|
A.F'*C\^*
 U N T OTH E R IGH TH ON OU R ABLETHE LORDSOF COUNCILAND SESSION

Minute of Amendment for the Petitioner

in the petition of

THE FINANCIALSERVICESAUTHORITY,a companylimitedby guaranteehavingits principalplace

CanaryWharf,London
of businessal24 f he NorthColonnade,

PETITIONER

for

lnterdictand interdictad interim

DUNLOPfor the Petitionercravesthe courtto allowthe Petitionto be amendedas follows:

1. At the end of Statementof Fact 1, by insertingthe following:

"Sincepresentationof the Petitionand the grantingof interimordersin September2008,the First

Respondentshave been placed in liquidation.The Petitionerthus seeks no furtherorder against

the FirstResoondents."

2. In Statementof Fact10,

2.1. beforethe penultimate

sentencethereof("Accordingly,
it is necessary...",
by insertingthe
following:

"All
of the actions of the First Resoondentsas hereinbeforenarratedwere undertaken
who was the directingmind and prime
under the directionof the Second Respondent,
Those actionsamountedto widescaletakingof unlaMul
moverin the FirstRespondents.
depositsdespitethe lack of authorisationon the part of either Respondentto carry out
regulatedactivities.While the liquidationof the First Respondentshas brought the
particularCapitalInjectionschemeto an end, the scale of the unlawfuldeposittaking
referredto means that the Petitioneris reasonablyapprehensivethat, unless restrained,
will, eitheractingaloneor throughsome othercorporatevehicle,
the SecondRespondent
seek to replicatethe unlawfulactivitieshereinbeforedescribed.

",
2.2. in the penultimate
sentencethereof,by deletingthe words and from disposingof or
dealingwiththe moniesheld in the aforementioned
bankaccounts".

C : " N r P o r r b l ' , c i r n a n a g e \ Y N E W S O \ , 1 E \ 2 3 9 6I .2D9O

2C | 5 O c t o b e r2 0 0 9
In the Prayer of the Petition,by deletingthe words "(a) to interdictthe said Cameron Farley
Limited... NationalWestminster
Bank,B GeorgeStreet,Edinburgh",
and by insertingthereforthe
following:

"to
interdictthe Second Respondent,StephenAntonia Farley,from carryingon or purportingto
carry on, whether directly or indirectlyand whether by his servants,agents or otherwise,a
regulatedactivityin contraventionof s.19 of the FinancialServicesand MarketsAct 2O0Oby the
unlaMul acceptingof depositswithinthe meaningof the FinancialServicesand MarketsAct 2000
(Regulated
Activities)
Order2001".

IN RESPECTWHEREOF

2
C : \ N r P o r t b l \ c i u r a n a g c \ Y N E W S OE\'4, J 3 9 6 2 9 2I . D O C I _ 5O c t o b e r2 0 0 9
 Edinburgh,
Certified a

Signed:
Date:

UNTOTHE RIGHT HONOURABLETHE LORDS OF COUNCILAND SESSION

Certified Copy
The Petition of

AUTHORITYa company
TT{EFNANCIAL SERVICES ard havingits
limitedby guarantee
principal placeof businessat 25TheNorth Colonnade,Canary Wharl London,814 5HS

letitioner

for

Interdict and interdict ad interim

I{UMBLY SF{EWETH:-
I , l'hat the petitioner is thc FrinancialServicesAuthority, a company limited by guarantee
and laving its principal olfices at 25 The North Colonnade,Canary Wharf, Loncion,E14
5HS. The first respondentsare Cameron Farley Limited, a compan)'incolporateCunder
the Companies Acts (registration number 05031602) and u'ith its princii>al place of
businessat MNB Rusirress!,xc!range,9-i0 St Airdrews Square,Edinburgh, EtI2 2AF.
fhe secold responclentis StephenAntolia Farley, residing at The Old Mil! House, 40
Nerv Mills Road" Dalkeith, Eif22 zAQ" The second responCentis the sole <iirectorof and
principal shareholderin the first respondents.Theseproceedingshave,as their object, the
. restraininqof apprchendedurongful acts which, were they to re-occur,would take effect
'l'his
in Scollind. court has iurisdiction.

2. That tlie petitioner carries out regulatory functions pursuantto the Financial Services&
Marlets Act 2000 ("FS\{A"). The petitioner carries out these ftmctions with a view to
nraintailing conficlencein the financial system, promoting public understandingof the
filancial s1,stetn,securfutgtiie appropriate degree of protection for consumers, and
reducing thc exte;i co tvhich it is possible fbr a businesscarried out in contraventionof
the general prohibition to bc rised for a purpose {jonllectcd with financial crime. The
 petitioner is empoweredunder FSMA to seek various orders from the court, including
interdict, in the eventof a personcontraveninga relevantrequirementof the Act.

uNo person may carry on a regulated activity in the

3. Section 19 of FSMA provides:-
United Kingdom, or purport to do so, unless he is- (a) an authorised person; or (b) an
exemptperson."
Section22 provides:-
" (l An activity is a regulated activity
) for the purposes of this Act if it is an activity of
a specified kind which is carried on by way of businessand -
(a) relates to an investmentof a specified kind; or
(b) in the case of an activity of a kind whtch is also specifiedfor the purposes
ofthis paragraph, is carried on inrelationto property ofany kind'
(4) "Investment" includes any asset,right or interest.
(5) "Specfied" meansspecifiedin an order made by the Treasury'"
Section23 makes it a criminal offence to breachthe generalprohibition in section 19' If
an offence under FSMA is committed by a body corporate, an officer of the body
corporate is also guilty of the offence if the offence was committed with his consent or
connivance, or was attributable to any neglect on the part of the officer. Reference is
madeto section400, FSMA.

4. Section 380 of FSMA authorisesthe petitioner to make application to the Court of

Session in the event that there has been, or is likely to be, a contravention of a
requirementimposedby or underFSMA. Section380(1),(3) & (6) provide:-
*(I) If on the application of the Authority..-.thecourt is satisfied-

(a) that there is a reasonablelikelihood that any person will contrqvenea relevant

requirement,or
(b) that any person has contravened a relevant requirement and that there is a
reasonablelikelihood that the contraventionwill continueor be repeated,
the court may make an order restraining (or in Scotland an interdict prohibiting) the
contravention.

(3) If, on the application of the Authority.....thecourt is satisfiedthat any person may
have -
(a) contraveneda relevantrequirement,or
(b) beenknowingly concernedin the contraventionof such a requirement,
it may make an order restraining (or in Scotland,an interdict prohibiting) him from
disposing of, or otherwise dealing with, any assets of his which it is satisf ed he is
 reasonably likely to dispose of or otherwise deal with'

"
(6) " Relevantrequirement -
-
(a) in relation to an application by the Authority, meansa requirement

(i) which is imposedby or under this Act --."

5 . That the first and second respondentsare not authorised in terms of FSMA to conduct
any regUlatedactivity. The petitioner has become aware that the first respondentsare
"Capital lnjection" to their clients. The petitioner has
offering an investmentcalled a
been provided with copies of four documentswhich the first respondentshave been
providing to their clients. Thesefour documentsare (i) generalterms & conditionsfor
the capital injection, (ii) an interim agreement,(iii) a letter of intent in relation to profit
sharing, and (iv) a notification form. The general terms & conditions, interim
agreementand letter ofintent have been signedby the secondrespondenton or about
June2007. copies of thesefour documentsare producedherewith.

6 . That in terms of thesedocuments,the first respondentsinvite clients to invest between

f1,000 and f1,000,000 in the first respondents.The general conditions state that
"Capital injecttons in Cameron Farley Ltd are capital injections only and do not

represent share capital or any right to exercise any control over Cameron Farley
,//,. No indication is provided in the documentationas to how the first respondents
will use the monies to fund a return for the client. The client is offered a return by way
of interest comprising (a) a fixed rate of 9.25% per annum, and (b) a variable rate at
the discretionof the first respondents.The client is also offered a profit sharewhereby
the client is entitled to a share in the profit on any capital gain if the whole share
is
capital or businessof the first respondentsis sold. The calculationof the profit share
at the absolutediscretionof the secondrespondentwith no clearly defined criteria. The
"account document" will be issued which is the
general conditions provide that an
clients' certificate confirming the capital injection amount. The general conditions
state that the client may give written notice requesting repayment of the capital
"Cameron Farley Limited will transfer the value of
injection. On the repayment date,
your account with Cameron Farley Ltd to the capital injector". The client may also
sive notice to closetheir account.

or
7. That the documentationinvites customersto pay money by way of cheque, cash
bank transfer into two Capital Injection Accounts held by the first respondents-These
bank accounts are held with the National Westminster Bank at 8 George Street,
 Edinburgh (sort code 60 30 20). The bank accountsare identified in the documentsas
having account numbers 28096991 and NXNF JSQG-USD00. The petitioner has
received information that bank account 28096991 has had approximately f24.5
million credited over the previous 12 months and that the balance as at 28 August
2008 was fL,165,364.Bank accountNXNF JSQG-USD00had a balanceon 28 August
2 0 0 8o f $ i , 1 6 5 , 9 0 7 .

8. That the petitioner has had reason to be concerned about the activities of the
respondents,including the information given by them in responseto the petitioner. In
about June 2005, the petitioner made investigationswith the respondentsin respectof
possible unregulated activity. In the course of those investigations,the petitioner
discovered that the first respondents' website included a claim that the second
respondenthad completeda Securitieslnstitute Certificatein InvestmentManagement
whereasthe petitioner's inquiries revealedthat he had failed these exams and did not
hold such a certificate.On about 19 December 2005, the second respondentadvised
the petitioner that he had become an authorised representativeof Personal Touch
Financial ServicesLtd. Subsequentlyinquiries revealedthat PersonalTouch Financial
ServicesLtd had rejectedhis two applicationsfor authorisation.At an unannounced
site visit on 4 April 2007, the second respondentinitially advised the petitioner's
officers that all foreign exchangedealing for clients was organised through a US
company called Gain. The second respondentsubsequentlyadmitted that the first
respondentscarried out some foreign exchangedealings on behalf of clients. In an
application for authorisation submitted to the petitioner on behalf of a related
company, Cameron Farley InvestmentsLimited, the second respondentintentionally
failed to disclosepreviousinvestigationswhich the petitionerhad had into his business
activities. The petitioner has also become aware that the second respondenthas a
conviction for theft from 1991 and served a period of imprisonment following a
conviction for fraud in 1993.

9. That the petitioner has reasonablecauseto believe that the first respondentsare carrying
out a regulatedactivity, namely acceptingdeposits,without being authorisedto do so in
terms of FSMA. The Financial Servicesand Markets Act 2000 (Regulated Activities)
Order 2001, article 5, defines the circumstancesin which the acceptingof depositsis a
specifiedkind of activity. Article 5 provides:-
* (l) Accepting deposits ts a specified kind of activity if-

(a) money received by *oy of deposit is lent to others, or

(b) any other activity of the person acceptingthe deposit is financed wholly
 or to a material extent,out of the capital of or intereston moneyreceivedby
way of deposit.
(2) In paragraph (1), "deposit" means a sum of money, other than one excluded by
any of articles 6 to 9A, paid on terms -
(a) under which it will be repaid, with or without interest or premium and
either on demand or at a time or in circumstancesagreed by or on behalf of
the person making the payment and the person receiving it, and

ft) which are not referable to the provision of property (other than currency)
or services or the giving of security.
(3) For the purposes of paragraph (2), money is paid on terms which are referable to
the provision of property or services or the giving of security if, and only f, -
(a) it is paid by way of advance or part payment under a contract for the sale,
hire, or other provision of property or services, and is repayable only in the
event that the property or seryices is or are not in fact sold, hired, or
otherwiseprovided;
(b) it is paid by way of security for the performance of a contract or by way
of security in respect of loss which may result Jiom the non-performance of a
contract; or
(c) without prejudice to sub-paragraph (b), it is paid by way of security for
the delivery up or return of any property, whether in a particular state of
"
repair or otherwise.

10. That the first respondentsare accepting sums of money of between f1,000 and
f1,000,000 which are repayableon notice being given by the client. The sums accepted
are purportedly being used as capital to fund the business activities of the first
respondents.The investmentbeing offered by the first respondentsis not coveredby any
of the exclusions in the said Order. The first respondentshave no authorisationunder
I-SMA, nor are they exempt from the requirements of FSMA. ln the foregoing
circumstances,the first respondentsare taking part in deposittaking activities without any
authorisation to do so in terms of FSMA. The first respondentshave contraveneda
relevantrequirementof FSMA and there is a reasonablelikelihood that they will continue
to contravenesuch a requirement.Substantialsums are held in the first respondents'bank
accountsdue to the illegal deposit taking activities. It is necessaryto obtain an order
prohibiting the respondentsfrom dealing with any of the monies in the bank accounts
pending determinationof the full extent of the illegal deposit taking activities. Further,
the petitioner's experienceis that illegal deposittaking schemesoften result in substantial
lossesto clientswith subsequent
allegationsof fraud being made.The first respondents'
 bank statementsidentifu large depositsfrom investorsand regular sums being paid out to
investorsbut there is little or no evidence that the returns to investorsare funded fiom
genuineinvestmentreturns.Accordingly, it is necessaryfor the petitionerto seekinterdict
restrainingthe respondentsfrom engagingin illegal deposittaking, and from disposingof
or dealing with the monies held in the aforementionedbank accounts"Having regard to
the balanceofconvenience,interdict ad interim is also sought.

11. This petition is presentedat common law and under section380 of FSMA.

PLEAS-IN-LAW
t. The petitioner having reasonablegtounds to apprehendthat the respondentshave been
engaged in illegal deposit taking and continue to be so engaged,interdict should be
pronouncedas prayedfor.

2. The balance of conveniencefavouring the granting of interdict ad interim such order

shouldbe pronounced..

MAY IT TF{EREFORE please your

I-ordshipsto intimate this applicationon the
Walls; to appoint the sameto be servedupon
the persons named and designed in the
Schedule hereto; to appoint them to lodge
Answers hereto, if so advised,within twenty
one days of such intimation and service;and
thereafter, with or without answers, (a) to
interdict the said Cameron Farley Limited
and Stephen Antonia Farley, whether
directly or indirectly and whether by their
servants,agentsor otherwise,from carrying
on or purporting to carry on a regulated
activify in the United Kingdom and that by
accepting deposits in terms of a purported
Capital lnjection scheme,and (b) to interdict
the said Cameron Farley Limited and
StephenAntonia Farley, whetherpersonally
or through their servants or agents, from
disposing of, or otherwisedealing with, any
monies held in the first respondents' bank
accounts (account numbers 28096991 and
NXNF JSQG-USD00) held with the
National Westminster Bank, 8 George
Street, Edinburgh; and for such interdict ad
interirU; and to find the respondentsand any
other person opposingthis application liable
to the petitioner in the expenseshereto; and
to decem; or to do further or otherwisein the
premises as to your Lordships shall seem
proper.

According to Justice,etc,
 SCI{EDULE FOR SERVICE

Personsupon whom serviceis sought in common form:-

1. CameronFarley Limited, MWB BusinessExchange,9-10 St Andrews Square,Edinburgh,

EHz2AF.
2. StephenAntonia Farley,The Old Mill House,40 New Mills Road, Dalkeith, EH222AQ
3. National WestminsterBank, 8 GeorgeStreet,Edinburgh
 Certified Copy
The Petition
of

(rES fufUrAtl
fit i*r.{uA4/S-a.(-N ( r

for

lmd__b{cj{o.rUlNTd}{T }D iNtdiNA

tlP
McGRIGORS
FRHE'J9H.HANGE
STREET
1 EARLGREY
EDINBURGH
EH39AO DX.72gn|
EDINBURGH€

Il'{ . u{N\\-*lruvnl
noocz
D