A 2.7 billion-pound ($3.6 billion) mass lawsuit alleging foreign exchange manipulation was blocked by major banks, including JPMorgan, UBS, and Citigroup, on Thursday, dealing a significant setback to claimants seeking collective redress through the UK courts.
Leading the argument on behalf of thousands of asset managers, pension funds, and financial institutions was Phillip Evans, a former inquiry chair of the Competition Markets Authority in Britain, who argued that a collective action was the most effective way to secure compensation.
Based on conclusions by the European Commission, which penalized banks for over 1 billion euros ($1.1 billion) in 2019, the complaint was also filed against Barclays, MUFG, and NatWest, accusing them of coordinating trading practices in the foreign exchange market.
Major banks, including JPMorgan, UBS, and Citigroup, successfully blocked the 2.7 billion-pound ($3.6 billion) collective lawsuit, persuading the court that the claim lacked sufficient legal and economic basis to proceed as a mass action.
Read: Arizona Man Gets 6-Year Prison Term for Plot on Churches
Claim Background and Regulatory Findings
Phillip Evans, a former chair of the Competition Markets Authority’s investigation, led the argument on behalf of thousands of asset managers, pension funds, and financial institutions who claimed financial losses as a result of the alleged misconduct.
The case was also brought against Barclays, MUFG, and NatWest based on findings by the European Commission, which fined the banks more than 1 billion euros ($1.1 billion) in 2019 for breaches of competition law.
The Competition Appeal Tribunal was correct in identifying the merits of the claim as weak, according to Judge Vivien Rose, who ruled that the evidence presented did not justify certification of a collective action.
She went on to say that while some members of the claimant class could have a strong claim, they constituted “a tiny fraction” of the case’s overall value and had shown little interest in pursuing individual actions.
Court Ruling and Future Legal Options
MUFG and UBS welcomed the ruling, calling it a positive outcome. Barclays and JPMorgan declined to comment, while neither Citi nor NatWest responded immediately to requests for comment.
Evans said he would consider “what options remain available to pursue justice for those affected,” adding that alternative legal routes may still be explored.
“The practical reality is that opt-in procedures are unlikely to result in meaningful justice for the hundreds of thousands of ordinary individuals and businesses impacted by the banks’ unlawful conduct,” he said, emphasizing ongoing concerns about access to redress.
