header-logo header-logo

04 July 2012
Issue: 7521 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Banks in big bother

Banking abuse prompts reform promise from Chancellor

The Banking Reform Bill or Financial Services Bill could be amended to give regulators extra powers to deal with abuse of LIBOR and other price-setting mechanisms, Chancellor George Osborne told MPs this week.

Speaking in the House of Commons, Osborne said: “Fraud is a crime in ordinary business; why shouldn’t it be so in banking?”

Lord Turner, chairman of the Financial Services Authority (FSA), says the FSA does not have powers to pursue criminal sanctions.

Osborne said there were “gaping holes” in the law. Amendments would be brought forward to ensure fines paid by the financial services industry go to the Exchequer not the regulatory body. He has appointed Martin Wheatley, chief executive designate of the Financial Conduct Authority (one of the bodies that will replace the FSA) to review the adequacy of the UK’s civil and criminal sanctioning powers with respect to financial misconduct and market abuse.

The Serious Fraud Office is expected to decide by the end of this month whether it will bring criminal charges.

Barrister PJ Kirby, of Hardwicke, whose practice includes banking and professional negligence, says he is not surprised by the LIBOR manipulation scandal, and “often sees fairly dubious practices”.

“In a sense one wonders whether bankers have learnt anything from history in the last 160 years,” he says.

“Market manipulation has been common throughout the generations. We had the collapse of BCCI more than 20 years ago, the ‘stagging’ or multiple share applications over the sale of state assets in the 1980s, and the ‘Flaming Ferraris’ in the early 1990s, yet they keep coming round in circles.”

Issue: 7521 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll