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

Time for which Large Orders were live, amendments to price and cancellation decisions

Time for which Large Orders were live, amendments to price and cancellation decisions

605.

Whilst Mr Lopez sought to set out a picture of the careful and thorough analysis he would have undertaken to determine pricing and positioning of his Large Orders, they were generally live for a short period of time, and he sometimes amended the price very quickly after placing the order, or cancelled an order on the basis of what he says was a decision that it was not going to execute but then placing another order (at a less attractive price) shortly afterwards:

(1)

The time for which Mr Lopez’s Large Orders were live in the Single Trader Instances that were Specified Instances ranged from 3.267 seconds (in F56) to 16.269 seconds (in F190). They were cancelled shortly after the Small Order in the opposite direction filled, with the range being from 0.58 seconds (in F177) to 5.213 seconds (in F190).

(2)

Mr Lopez had placed Large Orders in three of the Multi Trader Instances. There was a greater variation in the length of time for which these orders were live, namely one minute 52 seconds in F31, 7.16 seconds in F174 and 50.926 seconds in F205. However, the consistency or coincidence was in the cancellation times. Mr Lopez cancelled his Large Order 0.995 seconds and 2.324 seconds after his Small Order filled in F174 and F205 respectively. Mr Urra’s Small Order was only partially filled (36 out of 39 lots) in F31, but Mr Lopez cancelled his Large Order within 0.135 seconds of Mr Urra’s cancellation of his Large Order.

(3)

Where Mr Lopez amended the price of the Large Order, it was live at its new level for less than five seconds in F42, F62 and F63 (and in F63 it was cancelled within two seconds of the second amendment to the price).

(4)

The Instances show that having cancelled a Large Order, he placed a new Large Order in the same direction at a less attractive price shortly afterwards – if he had kept the first order on the market, he could have bought at that price:

(a)

F62 and F63 took place on 16 June 2016. In F62 he placed a Large Order to buy 200 lots for 139.76 at 11.04.52.596, amending this to 139.77 about three seconds later. He cancelled the order at 11.04.58.313, 1.582 seconds after his Small Order filled. In F63 he placed a new Large Order at 11.13.30.597 for 139.81, increasing the price to 139.83 during the course of the Instance. That order was live for 13.797 seconds, and was cancelled 1.073 seconds after his Small Order filled. Less than an hour later, when hedging for Mr Urra, Mr Lopez bought at 139.96 during F64.

(b)

F74 took place on 17 June 2016. Mr Lopez had placed a Lone Large Order to buy 200 lots for 140.26. That order was cancelled after three seconds. F74 took place 40 minutes later, during the course of which he placed a Large Order to buy for 140.39, which he increased to 140.40

606.

There is no consistency to the length of time that the Large Orders were live in the market. In contrast, there does appear to be a degree of consistency between the trading of the Small Order and the cancellation of the Large Order.