Osborne’s attack on financial markets abuse
In his Mansion House speech on 12 June 2014, chancellor George Osborne announced a number of measures in light of recently alleged or established market abuses, principally manipulation of benchmarks for forex, gold and, most famously, interest rates (the LIBOR scandal).
Collyer Bristow describes below the measures; their likely effectiveness; timeframes for implementation; and possible developments thereafter.
The first announcement in the chancellor’s speech was a Fair & Effective Markets Review, to be conducted jointly by the Treasury, the Bank of England and the Financial Conduct Authority. The review will look at standards in three markets: fixed income, currencies and commodities. The chancellor hinted that laws pursuant to the review could be sweeping, with some requiring international agreement…
Click on the link below to read the rest of the Collyer Bristow briefing.
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 Collyer Bristow
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Collyer Bristow
In a decision that has been welcomed by the Association of Residential Managing Agents, the Court of Appeal has overturned the earlier decision in Phillips v Francis.
In an important decision, the High Court has held that a property valuer was liable in negligence to the issuer of securitised bonds.