A statement by the Serious Fraud Office on R v Hayes and R v
Palombo.
The Serious Fraud Office investigates and prosecutes the most
complex fraud, bribery and corruption cases affecting the UK and
the safety of our economy.
Today's Supreme Court decision comes thirteen years after we
first investigated the practice used by some traders and
submitters at selected banks to influence key benchmark rates of
interest in financial markets.
These rates were called the London Inter-bank Offered Rate
(“LIBOR”) and the Euro Inter-bank Offered Rate (“EURIBOR”) and
they affected the value of hundreds of trillions of dollars'
worth of financial products around the world, including ordinary
people's pensions, mortgages and savings.
Our investigation led to nine convictions of senior bankers for
fraud offences, with two of these individuals pleading guilty and
seven found guilty by juries.
This judgment has determined that the legal directions given by
the judge to the jury at the conclusion of trial were incorrect
in Hayes' and Palombo's trials and for that reason their
convictions have today been found unsafe.
We have considered this judgment and the full circumstances
carefully and determined it would not be in the public interest
for us to seek a retrial.
29 August update
We have a duty, as a prosecutor, to inform past defendants about
any development that could affect their conviction.
At this point, we have made an assessment on six
individuals.
We consider that, in five instances, the circumstances that led
to and Carlo Palombo's appeals
being upheld by the Supreme Court could apply to them too.
We consider that the jury directions, given at Hayes' and
subsequently Palombo's trial and which were the basis of the
court's judgment, may apply to Jonathan Mathew, Jay Merchant,
Alex Pabon, Philippe Moryoussef and Bermingham's trials. Therefore,
their convictions may be considered unsafe.
For one individual, Peter Johnson, we have considered the
judgment in respect of his guilty plea, and we consider that the
conviction is safe.
It is for each defendant to consider whether they wish to
progress their case to the Criminal Cases Review Commission or
the Court of Appeal.
6 October update
We have completed our review of cases that could be affected by
this judgment. This includes Christian Bittar who pleaded guilty.
We consider his conviction is safe.
Our statement for media on this case is below:
Jason , Serious Fraud Office Head of
Division, said:
The Supreme Court found the jury, if properly directed, had ample
evidence to convict Hayes and Palombo and left it open to us to
seek permission for a re-trial. We've decided this wouldn't be in
the public interest due to various factors including that the
defendants have already served prison sentences.
We have advised every defendant how this judgment may affect
their conviction and it's for them to consider any next steps. We
remain firmly committed to our mission to investigate and
prosecute the most complex economic crimes in the UK.
