In recent years there has been a trend for findings by the
Financial Services Ombudsman ("FSO")
being appealed to the High Court on the basis that the FSO failed
to hold an oral hearing.
A recent decision of the High Court held that where there is a
material conflict of fact in a complaint before the FSO, the
constitutional right to fair procedures requires the FSO to hold an
oral hearing.
In Smith & Anor v Financial Services Ombudsman & Anor
([2014] IEHC 40), the appellants, on the advice of Ulster Bank,
joined a consortium of investors who invested in property.
The investments performed badly and the appellants suffered
significant financial losses as a result. The appellants made
a complaint to the FSO, alleging that they were never properly
advised that the investment scheme was of a high risk nature.
In response, Ulster Bank argued that the appellants were furnished
with a memorandum outlining the risk strategy, though the
appellants submitted that this
