Is this the end for swap mis-selling claims? The Appeal in Green & Rowley v RBS
By Philip Mantle
One of the difficulties encountered when advising clients as to the merits of their claim that they have been mis-sold an interest rate hedging product (IRHP), usually an interest rate swap, is the paucity of decided case law concerning the sale of such products.
There have been only two reported decisions concerning the (mis) selling of interest rate swaps: the Scottish case of Grant Estates Ltd v RBS  CSOH 133 and the solitary English decision of Green & Rowley v RBS  EWHC 3661. In both cases, the claims of mis-selling against the banks were dismissed.
Green was subsequently taken upon appeal, heard in July 2013, and the findings of the court at first instance were upheld. Although the decision was known in July, the Court of Appeal has only recently handed down formal judgment on 9 October 2013. As this decision represents the solitary appellate authority within the field of swap mis-selling, the formal reasoning behind the court’s judgment has been keenly awaited by both claimant and defendants alike…
If you are registered and logged in to the site, click on the link below to read the rest of the No5 Chambers briefing. If not, please register or sign in with your details below.
News from No5 Chambers
Briefings from No5 Chambers
Jack Feeny explores the new law in relation to protected disclosures following the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013.
Caroline Jennings reviews Palmer v RBS, which concerns whether or not a statutory restriction on eligibility for early retirement benefits could amount to age discrimination.