header-logo header-logo

26 September 2025
Issue: 8132 / Categories: Legal News , Fraud , Financial services litigation , Criminal
printer mail-detail

NLJ this week: Traders’ convictions quashed in Libor shock

230751
The Supreme Court issued a landmark judgment in July that overturned the convictions of Tom Hayes and Carlo Palombo, once poster boys of the Libor and Euribor scandal. In NLJ this week, Neil Swift of Peters & Peters considers what the ruling means for financial law enforcement

Hayes and Palombo were jailed for conspiring to rig benchmark interest rates tied to contracts worth more than $300tn. But the UK’s highest court ruled their trials were fatally flawed: judges wrongly told juries that submissions influenced by commercial interests were inherently false, usurping the jury’s role to decide fact.

Lord Leggatt blasted both the Court of Appeal and the Serious Fraud Office for ‘perplexing’ errors and botched indictments. The decision threatens other rate-rigging verdicts and reignites debate over whether juries should handle sprawling financial fraud.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll