header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
05 June 2015 / Alan Ward
Issue: 7655 / Categories: Opinion
printer mail-detail

3rd party rights & wrongs

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Post Macris, Alan Ward predicts a significant change in how regulatory enforcement in the City is conducted & publicised

Anyone with even a passing interest in financial services and the City will be aware of the $5.7bn (£3.7bn) in regulatory and criminal penalties levied against major banks last month, following the global foreign exchange (FX) investigation.

Many newspaper headlines papers asked the question: “Why aren’t these crooked bankers in jail?” But a better question might be: have any of the five UK and US regulators involved in the settlements even thought to ask the traders vilified in the headlines what they think about it all?

The informed observer might assume that the agencies that conducted these high-profile investigations would, at some point, have asked the allegedly culpable individuals for their explanation. However, a Court of Appeal judgment handed down the day before the FX settlements were announced has highlighted (and directed criticism at), the manner in which the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) attributes blame to identifiable individuals in regulatory notices, without first giving those

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll