B, R. v

B, R. v

The judge was entitled to find, based on expert evidence and the intrinsic terms of the Euribor Code, that panel banks were prohibited from submitting rates intended to create trading advantage. Belgian law did not require admission of extrinsic evidence where the common intention was clear. The judge's interpretation and procedural approach were correct, and the appeal was dismissed.

Parties
Respondent: THE CROWN; Appellant: B
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 January 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Preparatory Hearing Ruling
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Conspiracy to Defraud, Benchmark Rate Manipulation, Interpretation of Foreign Law, Admissibility of Extrinsic Evidence
Criminal Law Financial Regulation Conflict of Laws Conspiracy to Defraud Benchmark Rate Manipulation Interpretation of Foreign Law Admissibility of Extrinsic Evidence

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

THE CROWN

Respondent

B

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Preparatory Hearing Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Article 6.1 of the Euribor Code prohibits panel banks from submitting rates intended to create trading advantage
  2. 2 Whether Belgian law requires admission of extrinsic evidence to interpret the Code
  3. 3 Whether the Code is to be supplemented by principles of good faith under Belgian law

Ratio Decidendi

The judge was entitled to find, based on expert evidence and the intrinsic terms of the Euribor Code, that panel banks were prohibited from submitting rates intended to create trading advantage. Belgian law did not require admission of extrinsic evidence where the common intention was clear. The judge's interpretation and procedural approach were correct, and the appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Judge's preparatory hearing ruling affirmed
  • Reporting restrictions lifted on 25 July 2018