UT (Tax & Chancery) UT-2022-000134 UT-2022-000135 UT-2022-000137 - [2025] UKUT 00214 (TCC)

The rationale of the Anticipatory Hedging Strategy does not involve any connection with small orders that were placed in the opposite direction. Mr Lopez’s explanation for the overlap was based on his having entered 1,139 small orders over the Relevant Period, whilst also relying on the large orders that were outside the Instance Pool.

Of the 88 large orders Mr Lopez placed in the Relevant Period, only five did not overlap with small orders placed by one of the three Traders. Two of those five were placed very close to a small order in the opposite direction, including the Lone Large Order he placed on 17 June 2016 (to which he referred in his witness statement). These Lone Large Orders are addressed further at [729] to [736] below.

We agree that a level of overlap is to be expected. The Tribunal notes however the extent of the overlap between large orders and small orders, and, for the 55 Large Orders in the Instance Pool, the repeated coincidence in timing of cancellation being shortly after the Small Order filled.