header-logo header-logo

14 September 2012 / Eleanor Mumford-Smith , John Bramhall
Issue: 7529 / Categories: Features , Regulatory , Profession
printer mail-detail

The calm before the storm

Expect piggyback litigation in the wake of regulatory intervention warn John Bramhall & Eleanor Mumford-Smith

In a speech in 2005 in those halcyon days before the global financial crisis, Tony Blair (remember him?) described the Financial Services Authority (FSA) as being “hugely inhibiting of efficient business”. It was on the back of that sentiment that a light-touch regulatory regime took centre stage. However, the onset of the recession changed all that, as serious weaknesses in this approach to regulation were exposed. Regulators resolved to ensure transparency in the markets with a more interventionist approach, and a number of high-profile investigations have followed. Off the back of each new investigation, whether into PPI or CDS mis-selling, there has been a wave of litigation brought by disgruntled clients against financial institutions and related professionals.

LIBOR litigation

One of the most recent examples is the £290m fine imposed on Barclays for misconduct in relation to LIBOR, which has the potential to trigger a raft of litigation in the UK, as well

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll