Court of Appeal allows LIBOR claims to proceed to trial
In Graiseley Properties Ltd & Ors v Barclays Bank plc and Deutsche Bank AG & Ors v Unitech Global Ltd and Unitech Ltd  EWCA Civ 1372, the Court of Appeal allowed the borrowers in these two cases against LIBOR panel banks to amend their pleadings to include allegations of pre-contractual misrepresentation relating to LIBOR manipulation, with the court ruling that the amendments were at least properly arguable.
Graiseley Properties Ltd brought a mis-selling claim against Barclays Bank in respect of one interest rate swap and one structured collar, sold by Barclays Bank in 2007 and 2008 respectively as a condition of borrowing totalling £70m advanced to Graiseley by the bank. The interest rates under the swaps were referable to Sterling LIBOR. Following the findings against Barclays by various regulatory authorities in June 2012 in respect of Barclays’ role as a LIBOR submitting panel bank, Graiseley applied to amend its particulars to include allegations of fraudulent misrepresentation. In October 2012, Mr Justice Flaux gave Graiseley permission to amend its case to make claims related to LIBOR.
The Unitech action comprises two claims: one by Deutsche Bank (DB) and other lenders against Unitech Global Ltd (UGL) and Unitech Ltd (as guarantor) from a transaction for a syndicated loan facility of $150m (£110m) made to UGL in 2007 pursuant to a credit agreement; the other by DB alone against Unitech Ltd (again, as guarantor) relating to an interest rate swap entered into by DB and UGL as a condition of the credit agreement. The interest rates under the contracts were set by reference to USD LIBOR. The Unitech parties sought to introduce further defences and counterclaims that arose from recent publicity suggesting that DB was involved in the manipulation of the LIBOR rate during a period that included the dates on which both the credit agreement and the swap were entered into…
If you are registered and logged in to the site, click on the link below to read the rest of the Stephenson Harwood briefing. If not, please register or sign in with your details below.
Sign in or Register to continue reading this article
It's quick, easy and free!
It takes just 5 minutes to register. Answer a few simple questions and once completed you’ll have instant access.Register now
Why register to The Lawyer
In-depth, expert analysis into the stories behind the headlines from our leading team of journalists.
Identify the major players and business opportunities within a particular region through our series of free, special reports.
Receive your pick of The Lawyer's daily and weekly email newsletters, tailored by practice area, region and job function.
More relevant to you
To continue providing the best analysis, insight and news across the legal market we are collecting some information about who you are, what you do and where you work to improve The Lawyer and make it more relevant to you.
News from Stephenson Harwood
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Stephenson Harwood
This helpful one-page summary diagram shows the current expected timetable for Great Britain’s passenger rail franchises and concessions.
In Kays Hotels v Barclays Bank, the Commercial Court refused a strike-out application that was based on a bank’s argument that the claim was time-barred.
Analysis from The Lawyer
The Lawyer’s litigation reporter looks at the ongoing saga of the Tchenguiz litigation
‘Exotic’ investors and opportunities for legal work beyond M&A feature in The Lawyer’s high-level roundtable debate on south-east Europe