The judge in former trader Tom Hayes’ trial was ‘right’ to ‘roll up’ dishonesty with the question about deliberate disregard of the proper basis for submission of bank interest base rates, the Court of Appeal has been told.
The case of Hayes and Carlo Palombo was referred to the Court of Appeal by the Criminal Case Review Commission which found there was a ‘real possibility’ the court would follow the approach taken by the US Court in Connolly and Black and overturn convictions for rigging the LIBOR rate.
On the second day of the three-day appeal hearing, Tim Owen KC, for Palombo, said: ‘Noone has been prosecuted anywhere else, only in New York and here, to that extent we are alone. It is on the face of it surprising, one could say extraordinary, that in multiple national banks it depends were you are if you’re a criminal.’
James Hines KC, for the Serious Fraud Office, said: ‘It is not to be left to each and every jury to come to their own conclusions as to the meaning of something as important as that.’ He told the court ‘the nature of the conspiracy in the case of Mr Hayes has been mischaracterised’.
Speaking of the judge’s directions in Hayes’ case, Hines said: ‘[He] came to the conclusion that that could be rolled up with the element of dishonesty and we say that is with good cause. The judge was right to approach that question about deliberate disregard [the proper basis for submission of rates] as a matter of general dishonesty.’
James Waddington KC, for the SFO, said: 'Connolly and Black is a very well-reasoned decision which is worthy of respect…but there is nothing in that judgment, and nor has it been suggested so far, that there is anything in it which might cause this court to have a lightbulb moment of "ah, we should have thought of that".'
The hearing continues.
