A former boss at Bradford & Bingley who was criticised by a financial regulator has lost a fight keep his identity secret.

The Financial Services Authority (FSA) had decided to fine Christopher Willford £100,000 after criticising his conduct when group finance director at B&B.

Mr Willford complained that the FSA, now called the Financial Conduct Authority, had been unfair – and took legal action.

A High Court judge ruled in his favour but the Court of Appeal disagreed and said the FSA had acted fairly.

High Court judge Mr Justice Silber had held a hearing in private and published a judgment in a “redacted anonymised” form in order to ensure Mr Willford's identity was not disclosed.

And Mr Willford asked the appeal court to also publish its judgment in a “redacted and anonymised” form.

But three appeal judges rejected his request yesterday. They had “no doubt” that Mr Willford would be embarrassed if his name was revealed but said anonymity was “not strictly necessary in the interests of justice”.

Lord Justice Moore-Bick said the “principle of open justice” was important. He said: “Anonymisation and the redaction of judgments both represent derogations from that principle which must be justified, on the basis of cogent evidence, as strictly necessary in order to secure the proper administration of justice.

“The FSA was performing a disciplinary function. No doubt its proceedings would have been embarrassing for Mr Willford if his identity had been made public and it may be that they would have caused some damage to his professional reputation.”

The judge added: “But he would not have been entitled to have his identity protected on those grounds if, for example, he had for some reason been facing criminal charges, which could have had a similar effect. Nor is there any positive evidence that he will suffer significant harm if the existence of the proceedings is disclosed at this stage.”