Mintbroker International Ltd. has lost a judicial review it filed in 2019 in an attempt to have the Supreme Court set aside the Securities Commission of The Bahamas’ (SCB) decision to shut down the trader.
In September 2019, Mintbroker was under the microscope of the SCB and was forced to close its doors for five days while auditors took a look into the company.
But it contested that decision in court, contending the SCB’s actions were improper, only to learn in November last year that the court found that the SCB’s actions were in the best interest of the public and its decision to halt Mintbroker’s business for five days was justified.
Justice Ruth Bowe-Darville found in the ruling that the SCB “did not act for an improper purpose” by taking the action it did against Mintbroker.
“As deposed by the commission’s affiant, there were several breaches pre- and post-inspections and examinations. Other breaches had been repeated,” the ruling states.
“The commission in its affidavits in support, disclosed these and many other acts of non-compliance by the applicant (Mintbroker).
“In all, the applicant did not make full and frank disclosure as is required under the act and the attendant rules.
“The court finds that the Securities Commission of The Bahamas acted within its statutory remit and that its actions were not arbitrary, irrational, oppressive, or unreasonable.”
The SCB began in March 2020 to liquidate Mintbroker, it stated in a public notice.
“The commission has since, on March 5, 2020, commenced the winding up of the company in the Supreme Court, which matter remains ongoing,” the notice states.
“Further, in light of the mentioned ruling, the commission intends to pursue any attendant regulatory matters.”
In 2018, Swiss America Securities Ltd. (SASL), the former name of Mintbroker, was fined a total of $120,000 for several breaches, including breaches in maintaining documents and records; verifying client accounts; conducting know your customer protocols; conducting risk monitoring of clients; delivering details of insurance coverage; obtaining written consent for transactions affecting financial resources; notifying the SCB of outsourcing agreements and notifying the SCB of a name change for SASL and not notifying that name change at a meeting.
The SCB states in the public notice that anyone who has business interests with Mintbroker should contact the provisional liquidators at Ernst and Young.