European judges confirm EU bond trading cartel decision

The European Commission was right to fine Credit Agricole and Credit Suisse (now UBS) for colluding on price fixing of dollar-denominated bonds, European judges have found.

This is a final victory for competition commissioner Margrethe Vestager, who is about to hang up her gloves as Spanish pick Teresa Ribera is set to replace her in the new executive from December.

Traders of Bank of America, Deutsche Bank, Credit Agricole and Credit Suisse colluded between 2010 and 2015 on price fixing the trading of dollar-denominated bonds through internet chatrooms, the Commission found.

At the time, it imposed fines of €12.6 million on Bank of America, €11.9 million on Credit Suisse and a fine of €3.9 million on Crédit Agricole. Deutsche Bank was then granted immunity due to its cooperation in the investigation.

Credit Agricole and Credit Suisse lodged an appeal claiming that the Commission did not bring enough evidence of the infringement of EU antitrust rules and that their traders’ behaviour did not form part of “an overall plan” to pursue an anticompetitive objective.

The General Court decided Wednesday the EU antitrust enforcer was right in condemning the conduct of the four banks and that it made no mistakes in assessing its economic context and impact.

The cartel took place in the secondary trading market of Suprasovereign Sovereign and Agency bonds denominated in US Dollars in the European Economic Area. A group of traders from the four banks, who knew each other personally, were frequently exchanging sensitive information through chatrooms on Bloomberg terminals, or by phone, to provide updates on their trading activities and coordinate on prices shown to their customers and the market.

Credit Agricole took note of the Court’s decision, a spokesperson for the bank said, adding that it is “carefully considering the judgment of the EU General Court, and considering whether to appeal against the judgment”.

Contacted by Euronews, UBS refused to comment on the General Court’s ruling.