PolicyPulse.pro
a black and white chessboard with a white king and a black queen clashing and flying
Fatima Shahid

EU Court Upholds Cartel Ruling Against Major Investment Banks

25.03.2025 | Court of Justice of the EU

The General Court of the EU has largely upheld the European Commission's decision against seven investment banks for their involvement in a cartel in the European Government Bonds sector, while slightly reducing fines for two banks.


The General Court of the European Union has delivered its judgment in cases involving seven major investment banks accused of participating in a cartel in the European Government Bonds (EGBs) sector between January 2007 and November 2011. The banks involved include UBS, Natixis, UniCredit, Nomura, Bank of America, Portigon, and NatWest. The European Commission had previously found that these banks colluded to gain competitive advantages by exchanging sensitive information related to the issuance, placement, and trading of EGBs, which affected the entire market within the European Economic Area (EEA).

In its decision from May 2021, the Commission imposed fines totaling €371 million on Nomura, UBS, and UniCredit. However, Bank of America, Natixis, and NatWest were not fined due to various reasons, including time limitations for penalties and voluntary disclosure of the cartel by NatWest. Portigon's fine was capped at €0 due to negative turnover. Following the Commission's decision, six of the seven banks, excluding NatWest, appealed to the General Court seeking annulment or reduction of the fines.

The General Court has largely confirmed the Commission's findings, stating that a single and continuous infringement occurred, characterized by harmful practices such as exchanging commercially sensitive information, price-fixing, market sharing, and customer allocation. The Court emphasized that the anticompetitive actions of employees are attributable to their respective banks, holding them liable for the conduct of their traders.

While the General Court upheld the fines for UBS, it reduced the fines for Nomura and UniCredit. The Court found that the Commission had made an error in calculating Nomura's fine by not using the exact data provided by the bank. For UniCredit, the Court determined that the anticompetitive conduct began later than the Commission had indicated. The Court also confirmed that the Commission had a legitimate interest in identifying Bank of America and Natixis in the decision, even though they were not fined.

Consult source

Terms of Service | Refund Policy | Privacy Policy | Coverage
LinkedInFollow us on LinkedIn

© 2024 PolicyPulse. All rights reserved.

See something you like or don't like? Let us know!