UAE bank told to submit all documents in currency manipulation case

Rejecting the appeal of First Abu Dhabi Bank (FAB) against submitting documents to Qatar Financial Authority (QFC) in currency manipulation case, the Qatar International Court has asked the bank to submit all required documents and information held by it on transactions from June 2017 to Dec 2017. The court’s ruling supports the decision of the Trial Chamber that obligates FAB’s QFC branch to submit 21 types of documents and information held or controlled by the bank at any of its offices or branches in relation to the foreign exchange market of Qatari riyal.

REJECTING the appeal of UAE-based First Abu Dhabi Bank (FAB) against submitting documents to Qatar Financial Authority (QFC) in currency manipulation case, the Qatar International Court has ordered the bank to submit all required documents and information held by it on transactions from June 2017 to December 2017.

The court’s ruling supports the decision of the Trial Chamber that obligates FAB’s QFC branch to submit 21 types of documents and information held or controlled by the bank at any of its offices or branches in relation to the foreign exchange market of Qatari riyal.

Sensing irregularities in the functioning of First Abu Dhabi Bank’s QFC branch following the imposition of blockade on Qatar in June 2017, the QFC Authority had appointed investigators to investigate transactions of First Abu Dhabi Bank from June 2017 to December 2017 allegedly aimed at devaluing Qatari riyal in the foreign exchange market.

Based on its findings, the QFC Authority had asked FAB to submit 21 types of documents and information held or controlled by the bank at any of its offices or branches.

FAB, however, failed to comply with an order of the QFC Civil and Commercial Court and satisfy the regulatory authority of its fitness and propriety in respect of its conduct in the QFC.

FAB submitted what was said to be the documents in the possession of the branch and the bank refused to hand over any other documents on the grounds that the branch is not required to submit any other documents held outside the branch and that it is only required to provide information and documents in the possession of its QFC branch.

The QFC took action before the first instance Chamber to issue an order obligating the bank to comply with notification and delivery of documents. The bank also filed an appeal against the jurisdiction of the QFC in issuing a letter to the bank.

The first instance Chamber, however, ruled that the QFC Regulatory Authority had the jurisdiction to issue the notification and that there was a proper transmission in respect of the bank and ordered that the bank comply with the notification and deliver the required documents.

FAB had appealed against the ruling on the grounds that neither the QFC Regulatory Authority nor the Trial Chamber had jurisdiction over the bank.

The QFC Regulatory Authority (QFCRA) had earlier issued a supervisory notice to FAB that prohibited the bank from carrying on “any regulated activities” for new customers.

The supervisory notice prohibits FAB from carrying on, for any new customers, any regulated activities, including deposit taking, providing credit facilities, arranging deals in investments, arranging credit facilities and advising on investments at its QFC branch.

The court decision, however, does not prevent the FAB’s QFC branch from continuing to provide services to its existing customers.