Maia Cohen-Lask Comments on Hayes LIBOR Supreme Court Appeal in Corporate Dispute Resolution

Maia Cohen-Lask reflects on Tom Hayes’ potential Supreme Court appeal.

She highlights a key issue: the technical argument around the definition of LIBOR and whether it’s a matter of fact or law for the jury. Cohen-Lask suggests the UK judges are avoiding examining the conflict between UK and US criminal justice systems, where outcomes differ significantly on LIBOR manipulation cases.

She points out, “In the US, there’s insufficient evidence to argue before a jury about the LIBOR definition’s range, whereas in the UK, it’s now unequivocal that there’s no range allowed. Despite claims of different questions, it’s hard to reconcile the two approaches.”

You can read the full comments in Commercial Dispute Resolution