- Investor allowed to proceed with interest rate hedging claim based on Barclays conduct in FCA review (Suremime v Barclays)
- Practical implications
- Amending statements of claim
- The contract claim
- The claims in tort
- The duty in tort
- The White v Jones duty
- Reasons for allowing the tort claims to proceed
- Court details
Dispute Resolution analysis: The Bristol Mercantile Court has permitted an investor, who had brought a swap mis-selling claim against Barclays, to amend its particulars of claim to include new claims that the bank owed a duty of care in tort in conducting the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) redress scheme under which it had agreed to investigate and provide redress to customers where mis-selling of interest rate hedging swaps was found to have occurred.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial