LONDON – First Curaçao International Bank (FCIB) and its former president, Dutch businessman John Deuss, have secured another legal victory in the United Kingdom after an English appellate court refused permission to challenge a judgment dismissing allegations that they dishonestly assisted a major tax fraud operation.
The decision, reported by the British legal news service Law360 on Thursday, October 15, 2026, concerns a long-running dispute connected to approximately £415 million in creditor claims arising from an international value-added tax (VAT) fraud scandal.
The case was brought by the liquidators of Transworld Payment Solutions UK Limited (TWPS), a British company that provided marketing and related services for FCIB.
The liquidators alleged that the bank and Deuss had knowingly assisted companies involved in fraudulent trading activities that deprived the British government of substantial tax revenues.
However, the English High Court rejected the claims in October 2025, finding that the evidence did not establish the alleged dishonest conduct by Deuss or the bank.
The latest appellate decision leaves that judgment undisturbed.
The dispute dates back to the early 2000s, when FCIB provided banking services to companies trading in telecommunications equipment and computer components.
Some of those companies were involved in what British authorities describe as Missing Trader Intra-Community fraud, commonly known as MTIC or carousel fraud.
This form of fraud generally involves companies purchasing goods across European borders without paying VAT, subsequently selling those goods domestically while charging VAT, and then disappearing without transferring the collected tax to the government.
The goods can pass through multiple companies, making the transactions difficult to trace and allowing fraudulent operators to claim tax refunds or retain taxes that should have been paid.
British tax authorities investigated extensive trading networks connected to these practices, including companies that maintained accounts with FCIB.
The liquidators argued that the bank's electronic payment services and its relationship with TWPS had helped facilitate the fraudulent transactions.
They also alleged that Deuss had played a central role in attracting the business of companies engaged in the schemes.
The claims were examined during a seven-week trial before the English High Court in 2025.
In a judgment issued on October 1, 2025, Mr Justice Leech dismissed the allegations against FCIB and Deuss.
The court found that the claimants had failed to prove that Deuss knowingly or dishonestly participated in the fraudulent activities.
The judgment also identified significant problems with the legal claims, including insufficient evidence linking the defendants to particular transactions, limitation issues, and the consequences of earlier settlement arrangements.
The court distinguished between providing banking services to companies subsequently implicated in fraud and establishing that the bank or its management had knowingly assisted that fraud.
The liquidators subsequently sought to challenge the ruling, but the latest decision denied permission to pursue the appeal.
The amount of £415 million associated with the broader dispute should not be confused with a judgment ordering FCIB to pay that sum. Earlier court proceedings identified creditor claims exceeding that amount, while the claims pursued against the bank and Deuss involved different calculations of alleged losses.
The case has a long history in Curaçao.
FCIB came under scrutiny in 2006 as British and Dutch authorities investigated suspected VAT fraud involving its customers.
In October of that year, the Central Bank of the Netherlands Antilles withdrew the bank's license, and emergency measures were imposed.
The bank's involvement in the international investigations subsequently led to years of legal proceedings in several jurisdictions.
The dispute has also been examined by courts in Curaçao, where litigation concerning earlier settlement agreements and claims arising from the same tax fraud scandal has continued.
The latest decision in England represents another significant development in the legal aftermath of the FCIB affair, nearly two decades after the bank first became the subject of international investigations.
For FCIB and Deuss, the refusal of permission to appeal preserves the High Court judgment rejecting the allegations of dishonest assistance and fraudulent trading.
The case also illustrates the legal difficulties involved in attempting to establish the responsibility of financial institutions and their executives for fraudulent transactions conducted by customers many years earlier.