Upper Tribunal Tax and Chancery Chamber

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

Fecha: 31-Ene-2025

Overlapping Small Orders that did not overlap with Large Order

Overlapping Small Orders that did not overlap with Large Order

767.

Some of the Overlapping Small Orders identified by Mr Kasapis did not overlap with the Large Order in the relevant Instance. We consider this is significant, and means that the placing of the Large Order cannot be said to have (unintentionally or deliberately) been pushing the market away from such order. For this reason we consider that the existence of these Overlapping Small Orders is entirely neutral.

768.

This can be illustrated by the following Overlapping Small Orders:

(1)

F109 at 11.07.20.353 on 22 June 2016 – The order number identified by Mr Kasapis is that of Mr Lopez’s small sell order which had filled before the Large Orders were placed.

(2)

F180 at 8.42.46.542 on 1 July 2016 – The order number identified by Mr Kasapis was a buy order placed by Mr Urra that had filled before he then placed a Large Order to buy 444 lots.

(3)

F204 at 12.40.33.513 on 19 July 2016 – This involved Large Orders placed by Mr Urra and Mr Lopez to sell 444 lots and 200 lots respectively. The order number identified by Mr Kasapis was that of Mr Urra’s Small Order in F203 which had filled before these Large Orders were placed.

769.

These orders had been identified as “Overlapping Small Orders” as they overlapped with the Small Order in the Instance; but they did not overlap with the Large Order.