header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

What next for benchmark manipulation claims?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2025. All Rights Reserved.
14 March 2017 / Andy McGregor , Chris Whitehouse
Issue: 7739 / Categories: Features , Banking , Commercial , Litigation trends
printer mail-detail

Post-PAG, will claimants able to evidence fraud have greater prospects of success? Andy McGregor & Chris Whitehouse report
  • Where does Property Alliance Group v RBS leave benchmark manipulation claims?
  • Prospects of success will be enhanced if a party had substantive discussions with the relevant bank about LIBOR.
  • There is reason for greater optimism for potential claims relating to allegations of Forex manipulation.

In December the High Court handed down judgment in Property Alliance Group (PAG) v RBS [2016] EWHC 207 (Ch), [2016] All ER (D) 13 (Mar), to date the most comprehensive judicial analysis of a claim for damages in relation to LIBOR manipulation. This article considers the court's analysis of PAG's arguments and the implications for future LIBOR cases or other benchmark manipulation claims such as Forex.

LIBOR & why it matters

LIBOR, the London Interbank Offered Rate, is a series of daily interest rate benchmarks (in various currencies) administered by the British Banking Association (BBA) theoretically reflective of the cost of unsecured interbank

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Pillsbury—Peter O’Hare

Pillsbury—Peter O’Hare

Partner hire bolstersprivate capital and global aviation finance offering

Morae—Carla Mendy

Morae—Carla Mendy

Digital and business solutions firm appoints chief operating officer

Twenty Essex—Clementine Makower & Stephen Du

Twenty Essex—Clementine Makower & Stephen Du

Set welcomes two experienced juniors as new tenants

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Alarm bells over Mazur
The High Court’s decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys has thrown the careers of experienced CILEX litigators into jeopardy, warns Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers in NLJ this week
NLJ this week: Jury trial & a constitutional illusion
Sir Brian Leveson’s claim that there is ‘no right to jury trial’ erects a constitutional straw man, argues Professor Graham Zellick KC in NLJ this week. He argues that Leveson dismantles a position almost no-one truly holds, and thereby obscures the deeper issue: the jury’s place within the UK’s constitutional tradition
NLJ this week: The rise—and risks—of going private
Why have private prosecutions surged despite limited data? Niall Hearty of Rahman Ravelli explores their rise in this week's NLJ 
NLJ this week: Human rights disputes push courts to redefine their role
The public law team at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer surveys significant recent human rights and judicial review rulings in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Debarment orders—shortcut or minefield?
In this week's NLJ, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley examines how debarring orders, while attractive to claimants seeking swift resolution, can complicate trials—most notably in fraud cases requiring ‘particularly cogent’ proof
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll