In what can only be described as a plea for sanity, this very brief column has only one message – get over it people! In an absolute shocker (yes, that is sarcasm), a group of banks are being sued in the UK over FX manipulation and the use of chat rooms. This seems to have […]
The European Union has formally fined five banks a total of EUR 1.07 billion for taking part in what the EU terms two “cartels” in the spot FX market, involving trades in 11 currencies. Two settlement decisions have been announced, the first involves a group called the “Three Way Banana Split” which sees a total […]
FastMatch and Dmitri Galinov, the founder and former CEO of the company, have resolved the lawsuit filed by Galinov against FastMatch and its parent company, Euronext US.Under the terms of the settlement, neither party admits any liability or wrongdoing.“The settlement is in the best interests of the company, its employees and clients,” says a release announcing the agreement.Galinov left the company on 6 June, 2018 and is “pursuing other interests”, according to the release.Profit & Loss was unable to immediately contact a spokesperson for Euronext, while a spokesperson for Galinov says that as part of the settlement agreement both parties are unable to comment on the terms of the agreement.
There was an interesting line in a report in yesterday’s Handelsblatt discussing the impending lawsuit against the banks in Europe and the US. We, along with other news organisations, reported the impending European lawsuit at the time the US papers were filed (although it did apparently come as a surprise to some outlets who reported the European case “exclusively” one week later!) but the Handelsblatt report has a quote from a source at one of the plaintiffs that I found quite insightful and potentially signals a nightmare for the banks facing the case.
On Monday I called for a radical re-think around the FX industry’s use of benchmarks – and this elicited (and continues to do so) considerable feedback. Re-reading the latest class action over activities around fixes, however, made me realise this case could also end up revolving around pre-hedging – and if it does, then not only do certain industry bodies face a real challenge, but more broadly we have to discuss much more than restructuring one small piece of the market.
Just two weeks after the three members of the notorious Bloomberg chatroom The Cartel were acquitted in a New York court of manipulation of FX markets, a group of banks are facing yet another lawsuit from a class action of investors over their FX market activities.
The action has been brought by a group of major investors who explicitly opted out of the class action settlement last year that saw 14 of the 16 banks accused pay over $2.3 billion in damages (a 15th settled later).
Dmitri Galinov, founder and former CEO of FastMatch, has announced that he has filed a lawsuit in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York against FastMatch and Euronext US for the unlawful termination of his employment.
Galinov left Fastmatch just over one year after Euronext acquired a 90% stake in the company, his departure was seen by many at the time as surprising.
The lawsuit asserts that Galinov was fired in June 2018 “improperly, unceremoniously, and under false pretense” as part of “a Machiavellian scheme”.
The US legal system continues challenge many aspects of the OTC market structure, the latest being a lawsuit brought by interest rate swap trading venue provider TrueEx against a group of banks. To me, not only does the lawsuit highlight the general misconception that liquidity is an apparently valueless commodity, but it also signals – should the decision a certain way – a fundamental change in who decides what liquidity goes where…and believe me the LPs will not be the ones deciding.
BNY Mellon is facing further legal action over activities in its FX business as a class action suit has been filed in New York claiming it “charged excessive rates and mark ups” on ADR conversions.
The bank has previously settled similar cases surrounding so-called Standing Instruction trades with both US authorities and private claimants, however those cases were not brought in regard to the ADR business. As was the case with SI trades, the Plaintiffs claim that BNY Mellon “selected a transaction rate at or near the rate at which the currency traded that day that was virtually the worst for the ERISA Plans”.
Few can be surprised that such an increasingly emotive issue such as last look has led to a lawsuit. As someone who has disliked the practice for more than a decade and written about the risks associated with the regular rejecting of trades for more than seven years this class action lawsuit is not surprising – but I cannot help avoid the feeling that this is both someone trying it on, while at the same time it is the worst case scenario for the defendants.