Society's News

Corporate Members 2022

3PB Albion Chambers Ashfords Barcan + Kirby Beale & Co Bevan Brittan BLM Burges Salmon Clarke Willmott CMS CMNO DAC Beachcroft The Family Law Practice Foot Anstey (including Enable Law) Freeths Fussell Wright GL Law Guildhall Chambers Irwin Mitchell Solicitors Lyons Davidson Marc White & Co Meade King Osborne Clarke Paragon Costs Solutions Queen Square Chambers Royds Withy King Simmons … more

BLS features in Bristol Post oldest thriving companies in Bristol

Excerpt from the article: How Bristol’s oldest companies are still thriving after more than 100 years in business They include the city’s last-surviving chocolate maker a wine merchant and a tannery. Why do some companies struggle to survive beyond a year while others flourish for hundreds? Although more than 90 per cent of small companies in Britain will survive one … more

BLS Annual Awards Dinner 3rd November 2022

Check out our digital Awards Brochure with a welcome from our C0-Presidents, full details of the award categories and links to our wonderful supporters who make this event possible. We look forward to celebrating the best of the local profession with you on 3rd November! BLS Awards 2022 Digital Brochure Nomination Brochure 2022 Nomination Online Submissions Booking Form 2022

Clarke Wilmott’s Jon Green challenges interest rate hedging swaps

The Financial Conduct Authority (“FCA”) has now applied to intervene in and make written and oral submissions to the Court of Appeal at the appeal hearing of the interest rate swap case of Messrs Green & Rowley v The Royal Bank of Scotland plc.

The first instance decision of His Honour Judge Waksman in the High Court of December 2012 is currently under appeal and is due to be heard by the Court of Appeal on the 14 and 15 October 2013.

Jon Green, senior associate of the specialist financial litigation team of Clarke Willmott LLP solicitors now acting on behalf of the appellants, said:

“The FCA’s intervention to assist the Court of Appeal with regard to the interpretation of the FCA’s own rules is welcomed by my clients.

The appeal in this case raises two key issues,

1. Whether the statutory duty of compliance with the Financial Services Authority’s Conduct of Business Rules (“COB”) COB 2.1 and COB 5.4.3 gave rise to a duty concurrently owed to the bank’s clients in tort (negligence) ;and

2. if so, for the purposes of complying with COB 2.1 and COB 5.4.3, what was required from the bank as regards the extent of the risk warning it should have provided to its clients in  relation to the break costs of the swap product.

The Financial Services Authority stated in its Interest Rate Hedging Products Pilot Findings report of January 2013, which found that over 90% of the cases it had looked at did not comply with one or more of their regulatory requirements, that they expected to see:

“…that for the disclosure of break costs to comply with our regulatory requirements, the bank should be able to demonstrate that:

In good time before the sale, the bank provided the customer with an appropriate comprehensible and fair, clear and not misleading disclosure of any potential break costs.”

The FSA report came out a month after the decision of the High Court in the case of Green & Rowley.  Messrs Green & Rowley were not provided with the information that the FSA says it would have expected to see to comply with its regulatory requirements.

The decision in Green & Rowley therefore stands at odds with the findings of the FSA set out in its report of January 2013.

The appeal therefore has great significance for anyone sold an interest rate hedging product (“swap”) and any assistance that the FCA can provide to the Court of Appeal in determining the appeal is to be welcomed.”