Credit Suisse, MUFG inch closer to final settlement in LIBOR manipulation lawsuit
Credit Suisse Group AG and The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd., N/K/A MUFG Bank, Ltd are getting closer to securing a final Court approval of their settlement with the plaintiffs in a lawsuit alleging fraud and civil conspiracy to manipulate LIBOR. This becomes clear from a set of documents filed with the New York Southern District Court on June 8, 2022.
The documents, seen by FX News Group, reveal that plaintiffs The Berkshire Bank (“Berkshire”) and Government Development Bank for Puerto Rico seek final approval of their settlements with Credit Suisse and MUFG and appointment of Pomerantz LLP as Class Counsel for the Settlement Class.
The “Settlement Class” is defined as:
All lending institutions headquartered in the United States, including its fifty (50) states and United States territories, that originated loans, held loans, held interests in loans, owned loans, owned interests in loans, purchased loans, purchased interests in loans, sold loans, or sold interests in loans with interest rates based upon U.S. Dollar LIBOR between August 1, 2007 and May 31, 2010 (the “Class Period”).
Subject to this Court’s approval, Lender Plaintiffs, on behalf of the Settlement Class, have agreed to settle all claims against Credit Suisse and MUFG in exchange for cash payments of $380,000 and $380,000, respectively, and cooperation from the two banks. If approved, this $760,000 will be added to the $35,425,000 in proceeds from previous settlements that this Court has approved, resulting in a total recovery of $36,185,000.
The plaintiffs define the outcome as favorable given the many inherent risks in litigation. While the deadline for exclusions is June 22, 2022, as of this filing, June 8, 2022, the Claims Administrator has received only five requests for exclusion. Each of the entities also requested exclusion in the previous settlements. While the deadline for objections is also June 22, 2022, so far zero class members have objected.
The relief requested in the motion is appropriate, the plaintiffs explain:
- First, the Settlements are an excellent result; are fair, reasonable and adequate under the governing standards in this Circuit; and warrant final approval.
- Second, notice to potential members of the Settlement Class complied with Rule 23 and due process, such that it also warrants final approval.
- Third, the proposed Settlement Class meets all of the requirements of Rule 23 such that the Court should certify it for purposes of these Settlements.
- Fourth, Lender Plaintiffs’ Counsel has diligently prosecuted this complex class action and should be appointed as Counsel for the Settlement Class.
- Finally, the Plan of Distribution, which distributes funds on a pro rata basis, is a fair, reasonable, and rational method for distributing the Net Settlement Funds to the Settlement Class and also warrants final approval.