Law Firms File Class Action Suits Against JPMorgan

Author: Jon Clarke - Bullion & Economics Editor

Published: 26 Oct 2020

Last Updated: 2 Feb 2023


In the ongoing spoofing charges levelled against a number of multinational banks, two legal firms are filing claims for damages “on behalf of purchasers of the securities of JPMorgan Chase & Co.” 

 Credit: wikipedia - Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic

Class Action Lawsuits Filed

After a number of its traders admitted to manipulating metals prices and a record $920 million fine levied against it, New York’s Rosen Law Firm and California’s The Schall Law Firm has announced the filing of a securities class action suit aiming to recover damages under federal securities laws. Both suits look at the period between 23rd February 2016 and 23rd September 2020.

The Rosen lawsuit claims that:

  1. Traders manipulated precious metals prices by “spoofing” or placing fake orders to generate the appearance of market demand, with their superior’s knowledge and consent.
  2. The company were unable to identify and stop such practices because of insufficient compliance protocols.
  3. The company’s earnings from the precious metals market during the period were, in part, ill-gotten
  4. Such acts would require increased scrutiny by regulators
  5. The company gave misleading information to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) in the early stages of the investigation.
  6. The resulting government investigation led to a record-breaking fine.
  7. As a result of the investigation, the defendants’ statements about the business and its operations were false and/or misleading 

Keep Updated

We’ve been following this story for a number of months so we hope to provide information as and when it becomes available. We have written previously of the inadequacy of financial penalties, so these suits will be an interesting chapter to the spoofing saga.

While the class action suits against JPMorgan focus on plaintiffs’ possible losses, it would be interesting to see what happens to the gains made by the same people during the period in question. It would hardly be appropriate for any plaintiff that had made returns during the period to suddenly turn around and ask for damages for losses.

Related Blog Articles

This guide and its content is copyright of Chard (1964) Ltd - © Chard (1964) Ltd 2024. All rights reserved. Any redistribution or reproduction of part or all of the contents in any form is prohibited.

We are not financial advisers and we would always recommend that you consult with one prior to making any investment decision.

You can read more about copyright or our advice disclaimer on these links.