Four traders are appealing to have their rate-rigging convictions overturned after the Supreme Court quashed two rate-rigging cases on Wednesday.
Jay Merchant, Jonathan Mathew, Philippe Moryoussef, and Christian Bittar are seeking acquittal following the victory of traders Tom Hayes and Carlo Palombo.
All of the traders were convicted of manipulating the interest rates used for loans between banks, know as Libor in the UK, an issue at the heart of the 2008 financial crisis.
“Following the Supreme Court’s landmark decision yesterday to quash the convictions of Tom Hayes and Carlo Palombo, all four of our clients now intend to appeal against their convictions,” said law firm Hickman & Rose.
“In those circumstances, they don’t intend to comment further at this time,” the firm added.
The four convictions came after an investigation from the Serious Fraud Office into whether traders had been manipulating Libor for profit.
Libor became the focus of allegations of wrongdoing following the financial crisis in 2008 and has now been discontinued, while its European equivalent Euribor is being reformed.
Because the Supreme Court has now ruled in favour of Mr Hayes and Mr Palombo, the four traders’ appeal is likely to be a more straightforward process than for Mr Hayes and Mr Palombo who argued their case for years.
The Serious Fraud Office declined to comment on the appeal from the four traders on Thursday.
However, it said on Wednesday in response to the ruling on Mr Hayes and Mr Palombo’s case that it had “considered this judgement and the full circumstances carefully and determined it would not be in the public interest for us to seek a retrial”.
The Libor scandal came to light in 2012, when it was discovered that banks were artificially inflating rates to profit from trading and were also lowering them to mask the troubles they faced following the outbreak of the global financial crisis.
However, in 2023, the BBC uncovered evidence of a much larger, state-led “rigging” of interest rates, under pressure from central banks and governments across the world during the financial crisis.
Mr Hayes and Mr Palombo argued they were wrongly prosecuted for what were normal commercial practices in order to appease public anger towards the banks over the financial crisis.