Skip to content
© Copyright, Criminal Cases Review Commission 2026.

CCRC refers five city traders’ convictions following Supreme Court decision 

Published:

The convictions of five city traders, related to the setting of exchange rates, have been sent back to the courts by the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC). 

The referrals follow the Supreme Court decision last summer to quash the convictions of Tom Hayes and Carlo Palombo related to LIBOR and EURIBOR. 

The CCRC received applications from the five men last August, following the Supreme Court decision which was handed down in July.  

LIBOR (London Interbank Offered Rate) is the average interest rate that leading banks in London estimate they would be charged when borrowing from other banks. EURIBOR (Euro Interbank Offered Rate) is a similar reference rate for Euro zone banks. 

Alex Pabon, Jay Vijay Merchant and Jonathan Mathew were convicted of conspiracy to defraud in 2016 at Southwark Crown Court and were given prison sentences ranging from two to six and a half years. 

Mr Pabon and Mr Merchant were LIBOR traders based in New York. Mr Mathew was a LIBOR submitter and junior trader based in London. 

Philippe Moryoussef was a senior trader based in London and was convicted of conspiracy to defraud in 2018 at Southwark Crown Court. He was sentenced to eight years’ imprisonment.  

Colin Bermingham was also based in London and was responsible for making Barclays’ daily EURIBOR submissions. He was convicted in 2019 and given a five-year prison sentence. Mr Bermingham was convicted alongside Carlo Palombo. 

In their applications to the CCRC Mr Pabon, Mr Merchant and Mr Mathew submitted that the trial judge adopted and replicated legal directions which have been found to be wrong, and this undermines the safety of their convictions. The CCRC also believes the defendants were deprived of the opportunity to have their defence cases left to the jury.   

In the submissions of both Mr Moryoussef and Mr Bermingham, they argued there were the same misdirections and errors of law as those identified by the Supreme Court with Mr Palombo, and there was no sensible basis to distinguish the cases. 

After analysing the submissions in all five cases and reviewing the directions in the context of the Supreme Court judgment, the CCRC has determined there is no distinguishing factor between these cases and the cases of Mr Hayes and Mr Palombo, and the jury misdirection and legal errors have undermined the safety of all the convictions. 

Tom Hayes’ and Carlo Palombo’s cases were referred to the Court of Appeal by the CCRC in July 2023.  

In March 2024, the Court of Appeal upheld both Mr Hayes and Mr Palombo’s convictions. The case was subsequently appealed to the Supreme Court, which found that Mr Hayes and Mr Palombo’s convictions could not stand and overturned them.   

[ENDS] 

Notes to Editor: 

  1. The CCRC is an independent body set up under the Criminal Appeal Act 1995. It is responsible for independently reviewing suspected and alleged miscarriages of criminal justice in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. It is based in Birmingham and is funded by the Ministry of Justice.     
  1. There are currently ten Commissioners who bring to the CCRC considerable experience from a wide variety of backgrounds. Commissioners are appointed by the monarch on the recommendation of the Prime Minister in accordance with the Office for the Commissioner for Public Appointments’ Code of Practice.  
  1. The CCRC usually receives around 1,600 applications for reviews (convictions and/or sentences) each year. Since starting work in 1997, the CCRC has referred around 3% of applications to the appeal courts.     
  1. The CCRC considers whether, as a result of new evidence or argument, there is a real possibility that the conviction would not be upheld were a reference to be made. New evidence or argument is argument or evidence which has not been raised during the trial or on appeal.  Applicants should usually have appealed first. A case can be referred in the absence of new evidence or argument or an earlier appeal only if there are “exceptional circumstances”.       
  1. If a case is referred, it is then for the appeal court to decide whether the conviction is unsafe.      
  1. More details about the role and work of the Criminal Cases Review Commission can be found at www.ccrc.gov.uk. The CCRC can be found on X, Facebook, Instagram (@the_ccrc) and Linkedin.