The cases, which related to the setting of exchange rates, were referred to the Court by the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) in January, after the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) conceded the convictions may be unsafe.
In a ruling this week, the Court of Appeal cleared all five—Jay Merchant, Jonathan Mathew, Philippe Moryoussef, Alex Pabon and Colin Bermingham.
Tom Bushnell, partner at Hickman & Rose, who acted for three of the five, said his clients were the victims of the same unfair trials that led to the Supreme Court overturning the convictions of former traders Tom Hayes and Carlo Palombo, in R v Hayes; R v Palombo [2025] UKSC 29.
‘In that case, the Supreme Court ruled that a trial judge in the first of these cases committed a serious error by deciding for himself a question of fact that should properly have been left for a jury to determine,’ Bushnell said.
‘Today’s Court of Appeal judgment recognises that this error went on to be repeated in the other LIBOR/EURIBOR prosecutions. These prosecutions show how misguided the government's proposal to remove jury trial in serious fraud cases is.
‘At their core, the LIBOR/EURIBOR cases were simply about whether a group of individuals lied when estimating a number. This is a question that can and should be answered by jury. If it had been, we would not be here today.’
CCRC Chair Dame Vera Baird KC said: ‘It is only right that these five men have had their convictions quashed today, like Tom Hayes and Carlo Palombo.
‘During our review, and following the Supreme Court judgment, we determined there were no distinguishing factors between these cases, and the jury misdirection as well as legal errors undermined the safety of the convictions.’
The court is also considering the appeal of Deutsche Bank trader Christian Bittar, who pleaded guilty in 2018. Bittar argues that, despite the SFO contending that his conviction is safe, this should also be overturned.
