The Court of Appeal has allowed parties to two claims against LIBOR panel banks to amend their pleadings to include allegations that the banks made implied representations relating to the accuracy of LIBOR. In doing so, the Court held that the amendments were sufficiently arguable so as to have a real prospect of success.
This is a relatively low threshold and, whilst the parties will be allowed to plead the LIBOR allegations, they are likely to face some significant hurdles at trial (as set out in our earlier briefing following the first instance decisions, here). However, if the Court of Appeal decision stands the test of a potential appeal to the Supreme Court, banks can expect to have to argue such issues concerning whether implied misrepresentations were made, and (if so) what was their scope, at trial rather than dismiss them summarily. To read our briefing, click here.
Key contacts
Karen Anderson
Consultant, London
Susannah Cogman
Partner, London
Elizabeth Head
Of Counsel, London
Marina Reason
Partner, London
Kelesi Blundell
Partner, London
Hywel Jenkins
Partner, London
Chris Ninan
Partner, London
Jon Ford
Partner, London
Clive Cunningham
Consultant, London
Simone Hui
Of Counsel, Hong Kong
Chee Hian Kwah
Director, Prolegis LLC, Singapore
Valerie Tao
Knowledge Lawyer, Hong Kong
Cat Dankos
Senior Regulatory Consultant, London
Disclaimer
The articles published on this website, current at the dates of publication set out above, are for reference purposes only. They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought separately before taking any action.