May 30, 2013
CPI Cartel Column edited by Rosa Abrantes-Metz (NYU Stern School of Business)
Introduction by Rosa Abrantes-Metz
Welcome to the May issue of “From Collusion to Competition.” This month we will be reading about one of the most topical cartel matters of the recent times: LIBOR!
The manipulation and conspiracy of LIBOR is a most fascinating matter: first flagged by screens used by the Wall Street Journal and my own work with co-authors in 2008, and followed years later by other studies, in March 2011 we learned that UBS was being investigated. Soon after in the Spring of 2011 a leniency application was filed with the Department of Justice, and since then, admissions of attempted manipulation and collusion were made, jail time is already being served by some participants, settlement agreements have been reached (with more to come), investigations have been initiated in similar rates such as Euribor and TIBOR, as well as in other markets (swaps), some banks’ management have resigned, an impressive effort was initiated and led by the CFTC and FSA through IOSCO to reform financial benchmarks across the world, and of course, a significant amount of private litigation is underway.
The two excellent articles starred today provide comments on the recent decision by Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald of the Southern District of New York, on the consolidated class actions brought by a diverse group of investors against LIBOR panel contributing banks, in which allegations of antitrust violations were dismissed.
The first article by Peter D. St. Phillip, Jr. and Raymond Girnys, respectively Shareholder and Associate at Lowey Dannenberg Cohen & Hart, P.C., is titled “No Antitrust Injury In Libor Rate-Setting?—What Happened To Effects?”
No Antitrust Injury In Libor Rate-Setting?—What Happened To Effects? – Peter D. St. Phillip, Jr. and Raymond Girnys (Lowey Dannenberg Cohen & Hart, P.C.)
The second article, “A License to Collude,” is authored by Sandeep Vaheesan, Special Counsel at the American Antitrust Institute. Both articles put forward reasons why such antitrust claims should not have been dismissed.
A License to Collude – Sandeep Vaheesan (Special Counsel, American Antitrust Institute)
I hope you enjoy the reading as much as I have, this is certainly an engaging topic from a law and economics standpoint. We welcome your comments below.
Rosa M. Abrantes-Metz
Featured News
Judge Mehta Questions Both Sides in Landmark Google Antitrust Case
May 2, 2024 by
CPI
FCC Urges Urgent Funding for Removal of Chinese Telecom Equipment from U.S. Networks
May 2, 2024 by
CPI
Former Pioneer CEO Facing Potential Criminal Charges For Colluding With OPEC
May 2, 2024 by
CPI
South Korea’s Antitrust Regulator Greenlights K-Pop Powerhouse Deal
May 2, 2024 by
CPI
Exxon’s Pioneer Purchase Approved, Former CEO Barred from Board
May 2, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Economics of Criminal Antitrust
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
Navigating Economic Expert Work in Criminal Antitrust Litigation
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
The Increased Importance of Economics in Cartel Cases
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
A Law and Economics Analysis of the Antitrust Treatment of Physician Collective Price Agreements
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
Information Exchange In Criminal Antitrust Cases: How Economic Testimony Can Tip The Scales
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI