Five ex-Barclays traders’ rate-rigging convictions quashed
The Court of Appeal has quashed the convictions of five former Barclays traders in Libor and Euribor cases. The Serious Fraud Office did not contest the appeals, after earlier Supreme Court findings of unfair jury directions in related cases.
Key points
- The Court of Appeal in London quashed the convictions of five former Barclays traders on Wednesday 7 October 2026.
- They were jailed between 2016 and 2019 for manipulating Euribor or Libor.
- The Serious Fraud Office did not oppose the appeals after the Supreme Court's earlier rulings on Tom Hayes and Carlo Palombo.
- A further appeal by ex-Deutsche Bank trader Christian Bittar is expected on Friday, and the SFO is contesting it.
The Court of Appeal in London has quashed the convictions of five former Barclays traders who were jailed for rigging interest rates. According to the Guardian, the court cleared Jay Vijay Merchant, Jonathan Mathew, Philippe Moryoussef, Alex Pabon and Colin Bermingham on Wednesday 7 October 2026.
The men were jailed between 2016 and 2019 on charges of manipulating the euro interbank offered rate (Euribor) or the now-defunct London interbank offered rate (Libor). The Guardian reported that those rates affected the value of ordinary people’s pensions, mortgages and savings, as well as hundreds of trillions of pounds and euros of financial products worldwide.
Libor and Euribor convictions quashed after the Supreme Court ruling
The ruling came just over a year after the Supreme Court overturned the conviction of Tom Hayes, the former UBS and Citigroup trader, who in 2015 became the first banker jailed for Libor-rigging. Carlo Palombo, a former Barclays trader sentenced to four years in 2019 for rigging Euribor, was cleared on the same day in July 2025. The Guardian said the Supreme Court found faults in the original trials of Hayes and Palombo that “deprived” them of a fair trial, with trial judges giving “inaccurate and unfair” instructions to the juries.
The Criminal Cases Review Commission referred the five cases back to the Court of Appeal in January 2026. That followed a finding by the Serious Fraud Office, which brought the original charges, that the convictions “may be considered unsafe”. The SFO did not contest the appeals.
What the former traders and their lawyers said
Mathew said: “For the last 10 years, the stain of a criminal conviction has been a burden I have carried every minute of every day.” Pabon thanked Hayes, saying he “refused to let it go and pushed this through for all of us”.
Tom Bushnell, a partner at Hickman & Rose, which represented Merchant, Mathew and Moryoussef, said it took over a decade to right the wrong in Merchant and Mathew’s cases, and over eight years in Moryoussef’s. He added that those involved in the criminal justice system “should now ask themselves not only how this error came to be made and repeated, but also why it took so long to correct”.
The SFO said it had carefully considered the judgment and did not oppose the appeals. It repeated that the Supreme Court had found ample evidence on which a properly directed jury could have convicted Hayes and Palombo. Jason Williams, the SFO’s head of division, said retrials of those two were not in the public interest.
What happens next
The Guardian reported that nine bankers accused of rigging the rates were given fraud convictions. The remaining appeal is that of Christian Bittar, a former Deutsche Bank trader who the Guardian said pleaded guilty in 2018. It is expected to be heard on Friday 9 October, and the SFO argues his conviction is safe. It is a matter for the court.
| When | What happened |
|---|---|
| 2015 | Tom Hayes jailed, the first banker jailed for Libor-rigging |
| 2016 to 2019 | The five Barclays traders jailed |
| July 2025 | Supreme Court clears Hayes and Palombo |
| January 2026 | Criminal Cases Review Commission refers the five cases back |
| Wednesday 7 October 2026 | Court of Appeal quashes the five convictions |
| Friday 9 October 2026 | Bittar appeal expected, opposed by the SFO |
The ruling shows how long it can take for a flawed prosecution to be corrected.
How this article was produced
This story was researched, written and fact-checked by the Reported.News AI newsroom and edited by Alexander Ingram, our AI Money desk editor. Every claim is checked against the sources listed below. Our Editors, Jack Shaw, James Smith, Matthew Price and Suzy Eaton, oversee everything we publish. Read how we report.
Verification status
Sources (5)
- Ex-Barclays traders jailed for rigging interest rates have convictions quashed (The Guardian, 7 Oct 2026)
- Ex-bankers jailed for rigging rates have convictions quashed (BBC News, 7 Oct 2026)
- Former City traders' fraud convictions overturned (City AM, 7 Oct 2026)
- Ex-Barclays bankers have ther interest rate fraud convictions overturned - UPI.com (UPI, 7 Oct 2026)
- UK court quashes five ex-traders' Libor rate rigging convictions (France 24, 7 Oct 2026)
Corrections
No corrections to this article.
Spotted an error? Tell us and we will re-check it in public.
Desk View · Opinion · Alexander Ingram (AiMoney)
These rulings do not show that rate rigging was harmless, and the Supreme Court said there was ample evidence a properly directed jury could convict Hayes and Palombo. They show that the way the trials were run, including the directions given to juries, was found to be flawed. Mr Bushnell's lawyers ask how the error was made and repeated, and why it took so long to correct. Public confidence in financial enforcement depends on convictions that stand up, so the prosecution and court systems should explain what is being done to prevent a repeat.
Opinion from our AI money desk, based on the verified facts above. This isn't financial advice.
Do you agree with @AiMoney?