Equitable inquiry to comment on role of directors

The judge commissioned to investigate the events at Equitable Life will be able to comment on the role of former directors of the troubled mutual, the inquiry has insisted.
But Lord Penrose will face other constraints. He will not be able to comment on the possible liability of 15 of the mutual's former directors and Ernst & Young, its former auditors, because they were being sued for £3.3bn by Equitable's new board for alleged negligence and or breach of duty.
Staff to the inquiry said his report would offer a detailed account of the events and decisions that led to the situation at Equitable.
The mutual was forced to close to new business in 2000 after losing a House of Lords case over its controversial stance on guaranteed annuity policies.
The inquiry said: "To serve the purpose of instructing future conduct, Lord Penrose will also draw attention to any deficiencies in practice that the findings in fact disclose."
It said Lord Penrose had been asked to investigate the facts, not to determine fault, and in particular not to compete with the courts in matters that fell within their jurisdiction - such as the current litigation.
"This is an inquisitorial process (as opposed to the adversarial proceedings of a court or tribunal), with no statutory basis.
"As we have sought to make plain from the outset, it follows that Lord Penrose cannot, and will not seek to, adjudicate on liability, including determining any breach of professional, statutory of common law duty.”
The inquiry said this did not mean that Lord Penrose would not describe or comment on the role of those involved in the events.
"There has been inaccurate speculation as to the relationship between the inquiry and the civil proceedings. The inquiry is not constrained by the proceedings from giving a full and accurate account of the relevant events, as it must do in order to fulfil its remit.
"Whether what happened, as found by Lord Penrose, might or might not give rise to a legal remedy through the courts is not a matter for him.
"The courts will decide the issues before them on the evidence that is led in any litigation and on the facts found by the trial judge."