header-logo header-logo

17 October 2013
Issue: 7580 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Banks await fate of LIBOR

Court of Appeal to hear two LIBOR manipulation appeals

Banking lawyers will be closely watching the Court of Appeal this week as it hears two LIBOR manipulation appeals involving Barclays and Deutsche Bank.

However, a decision by the Court of Appeal last week in favour of the bank in the RBS interest rate swap case, Green and Rowley v RBS [2013] EWCA Civ 1197, gives bankers hope of a favourable outcome, according to City lawyer, Juliet Schalker, a partner at Rosling King.

The court dismissed the appeal of two Lancashire hoteliers, Rowley and Green, who claimed they were mis-sold interest rate swaps.

Schalker says the court found “that under reasonable circumstances banks are not responsible for customers understanding the nature of the risks involved when entering into a swap transaction.

“In light of this favourable judgment, no doubt Barclays Bank and Deutsche Bank will be hopeful for a positive outcome.”

She says the court will this week try to reconcile the decision in Graiseley Properties v Barclays Bank [2013] EWHC 37 (Comm), which “suggests there is an implied representation in loan agreements that a bank will not make false or misleading submissions which would then affect LIBOR”, with that of Deutsche Bank AG & Ors v Unitech Global Limited [2013] EWHC 2793 (Comm). In Deutsche, the court at first instance found in favour of the bank since it was unrealistic to allege that the bank had made a representation simply by being a LIBOR panel member. Schalker says: “In particular, the court held that an individual participating bank could not be held responsible for the overall integrity of the system.” 

If Graisley is preferred, she says, it may pave the way for more claims against banks based on allegations that the bank sold LIBOR related products. If the Lords Justice prefer Deutsche, on the other hand, customers may find it difficult to bring LIBOR manipulation claims in future.

Issue: 7580 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

42BR Barristers—4 Brick Court

42BR Barristers—4 Brick Court

42BR Barristers to be joined by leading family law set, 4 Brick Court, this summer

Winckworth Sherwood—Rubianka Winspear

Winckworth Sherwood—Rubianka Winspear

Real estate and construction energy offering boosted by partner hire

Gateley Legal—Daniel Walsh

Gateley Legal—Daniel Walsh

Firm bolsters real estate team with partner hire in Birmingham

NEWS
A wave of housing and procedural reforms is set to test the limits of tribunal capacity. In his latest Civil Way column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold charts sweeping change as the Renters’ Rights Act 2025 begins biting
Plans to reduce jury trials risk missing the real problem in the criminal justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, David Wolchover of Ridgeway Chambers argues the crown court backlog is fuelled not by juries but weak cases slipping through a flawed ‘50%’ prosecution test
Emerging technologies may soon transform how courts determine truth in deeply personal disputes. In this week's NLJ, Madhavi Kabra of 1 Hare Court and Harry Lambert of Outer Temple Chambers explore how neurotechnology could reshape family law
A controversial protest case has reignited debate over the limits of free expression. In NLJ this week, Nicholas Dobson examines a Quran-burning incident testing public order law
The courts have drawn a firm line under attempts to extend arbitration appeals. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed of the University of Leicester highlights that if the High Court refuses permission under s 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996, that is the end
back-to-top-scroll