In re Foreign Exchange Benchmark Rates Antitrust Litigation
- Lorna Schofield
- 1:13-cv-07789
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In re Foreign Exchange Benchmark Rates Antitrust Litigation: Judge Schofield entered judgment for Credit Suisse Defendants after the jury rejected Plaintiffs’ conspiracy proof.
Plaintiffs’ remaining Section 1 Sherman Act claims against Credit Suisse AG, Credit Suisse Group AG, and Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC were resolved by judgment in favor of those defendants.
What happened
In re Foreign Exchange Benchmark Rates Antitrust Litigation involved Plaintiffs’ remaining claims under Section 1 of the Sherman Act against Credit Suisse AG, Credit Suisse Group AG, and Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC. A jury trial began on the two issues for which class certification had been granted.
The jury found that Plaintiffs had not proved that the Credit Suisse Defendants knowingly participated in a conspiracy to widen, fix, stabilize, or maintain bid-ask spreads in the foreign exchange market. The court explained that knowing participation in a conspiracy was required for Plaintiffs’ remaining Section 1 claims.
Judge Schofield entered judgment for the Credit Suisse Defendants and against Plaintiffs on those Section 1 claims. The court retained jurisdiction over matters concerning the judgment.
The detailed version
- In re Foreign Exchange Benchmark Rates Antitrust Litigation · No. 1:13-cv-07789
- Lorna Schofield
- Oct. 24, 2022
Background
The opinion is an order for judgment following a jury trial. The trial began on October 11, 2022, on two issues for which class certification had been granted. The defendants addressed in this order were Credit Suisse AG, Credit Suisse Group AG, and Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC, collectively called the “Credit Suisse Defendants.”
Jury Verdict
On October 20, 2022, the jury returned a special verdict. It found that Plaintiffs had not proved, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the Credit Suisse Defendants knowingly participated in a conspiracy to widen, fix, stabilize, or maintain bid-ask spreads in the foreign exchange market.
Ruling
The court stated that knowing participation in a conspiracy is an element of Plaintiffs’ remaining claims under Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1. The court therefore ordered that judgment be entered in favor of the Credit Suisse Defendants and against Plaintiffs on the Section 1 claims in the Third Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint. The court also retained jurisdiction over matters pertaining to the judgment.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.