Michael Park Michael Park testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee during his confirmation hearing to be U.S. circuit judge for the Second Circuit in February 2019. Photo: Diego M. Radzinschi/ALM

A proposed class of investors has standing to sue some of the world's largest financial institutions over their alleged manipulation of benchmark interest rates used to price financial derivatives in the yen currency market, a Manhattan-based appeals court said on Wednesday.

The ruling, from a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, revived a lawsuit against Citibank, HSBC Holdings, Merrill Lynch International and other banks accused of rigging the yen LIBOR and Euroyen TIBOR, which reflect the cost of borrowing Japanese yen.

A Manhattan federal judge had dismissed the case in 2017, finding that the complaint had failed to establish Article III standing. The Second Circuit, however, ruled on Wednesday that the plaintiffs, a group of investment funds, had adequately alleged economic injury as a result of the bank's alleged market manipulation.

"Plaintiffs have plausibly pled that they suffered 'monetary loss' in these transactions as a result of Defendants' alleged manipulation of interest rates, and this is sufficient injury in fact for Article III standing," U.S. Circuit Judge Michael Park wrote on behalf of the panel.

He was joined in the decision by Judges Rosemary Pooler and Gerard Lynch.

The 381-page complaint, filed in July 2015, alleged violations of the Sherman Act and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, stemming from a supposed conspiracy among the banks to fix the price of financial derivatives between 2006 and 2011.

The banks argued that the case was simply an attempt to "circumvent" a ruling by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, which dismissed similar claims of an alleged conspiracy in 2012. The plaintiffs, defense counsel said, also lacked standing to bring the suit because none of the plaintiffs had traded the actual derivatives at issue.

The appeals court, however, said the complaint had identified "numerous instances" where the funds had entered derivative transactions at prices resulting from the bank's alleged price-fixing, and said the lawsuit established a link between the yen LIBOR rate and yen foreign exchange forwards, as well as two other types of derivatives.

"The complaint adequately alleges that Yen LIBOR is routinely used to price Yen FX forwards, and Plaintiffs provide detailed supporting allegations, including an explanation of the role Yen LIBOR plays in the generic pricing formula. No more is required at this stage," Park said.

Attorneys for both sides were not immediately available to comment on the ruling.

The plaintiffs are represented by Eric Citron of Goldstein & Russell in Baltimore; Vincent Briganti, Geoffrey Horn, Peter St. Phillip Jr., Lee Lefkowitz and Christian Levis of Lowey Dannenberg in White Plains; and Joseph Tobacco Jr. of Berman Tobacco in San Francisco.

The banks are represented by David Lesser and Jamie Dycus of Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr in New York and Ari Savitzky, from the firm's Washington, D.C., office.

The case is captioned Sonterra Capital Master Fund v. UBS.

Read More:

Citibank Agrees to Pay $100M to Settle AGs' Suit Over Alleged Interest-Rate Manipulation

Société Générale Agrees to $860M Penalty in FCPA, LIBOR Cases

Schwab Plaintiffs See Libor Suit Revived by Second Circuit