header-logo header-logo

Cleaning up the City

13 June 2014
Issue: 7611 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Lawyers have warned that regulators may take an “aggressive approach”, following the Chancellor’s proposals for new criminal offences to curb manipulation of the financial markets.

Chancellor George Osborne announced plans this week in his Mansion House speech to tackle rogue traders, extending existing LIBOR legislation to make it a criminal offence to rig the foreign exchange, fixed income and commodities benchmarks.

Richard Burger, regulatory partner at RPC, says: “The number of prosecutions achieved by the regulators with their new powers will be seen as the yardstick of their success.

“This will put them under a huge amount of pressure to achieve results and almost guarantees a highly aggressive approach. The SFO’s director, David Green, has said he expects to be judged by the results of the agency’s prosecutions of those involved in LIBOR and now the same will be true for future foreign exchange manipulation.

“The introduction of new criminal charges will mean that businesses will feel compelled to increase the already substantial investment they make in compliance for foreign exchange and other fixed income trading teams.”

Andy McGregor, RPC banking litigation partner, says: “The banks are already under a huge amount of regulatory pressure in relation to manipulation of the foreign exchange market, but in financial terms the banks face a similar risk as regards civil litigation from pension funds and other fund managers that lost money because of FX manipulation if there are adverse regulatory findings.

“If regulators find that the banks sought to manipulate FX benchmarks it will be much more straightforward for fund managers to demonstrate that they lost money than it was with Libor, so we anticipate a much larger number of high value disputes against the banks.”

The Chancellor announced a 12-month Fair and Effective Markets Review will be led by Bank of England deputy governor for markets and banking, Minouche Shafik, with Martin Wheatley (chief executive officer, FCA) and Charles Roxburgh (director general, Financial Services, HM Treasury) as co-chairs.

Issue: 7611 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll