The court is on the verge of making decisions on the cases of two ex-City traders imprisoned for manipulating interest rates, with concerns raised by senior politicians about potential miscarriages of justice.
If successful, the traders’ appeal, contested by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO), could result in overturning all remaining convictions from nine trials.
Tom Hayes, a former UBS trader, was the first banker jailed for interest rate manipulation in 2015. Accused of leading a global fraud scheme, he received a 14-year sentence.
Alongside ex-Barclays trader Carlo Palombo, Hayes awaits a crucial Supreme Court ruling. Both were among 37 traders charged with tampering with Libor and Euribor rates, affecting millions of mortgages and loans.
Despite revelations of similar actions pushed by officials globally, no charges were brought against them. The US dismissed charges against Hayes, but UK convictions stand.
Senior figures, like John McDonnell, voice concerns over possible scapegoating of traders and call for a public inquiry into broader rate rigging.
Libor, akin to FTSE 100 for shares, tracked bank borrowing costs daily. Traders influenced rates by selecting high or low submissions, impacting bank trades linked to Libor/Euribor.
While traders argue minimal impact on rates, SFO viewed actions as fraudulent conspiracy. Hayes believed his actions were standard practice, but courts deemed them unlawful.
Critics note discrepancies in prosecuting traders versus higher-ranking officials involved in larger-scale rate manipulation during the 2008 crisis.
Hayes and Palombo challenge court rulings retroactively criminalizing their actions, emphasizing potential implications for workplace practices.
The road to the Supreme Court involved multiple legal hurdles, with recent developments paving the way for a crucial judgment on the traders’ fate.