Bank glee as BCCI case fails to dent reputation

[emad]

Financial Times
By Nikki Tait
Published: February 14 2005 02:00 | Last updated: February 14 2005 02:00

It is over a year since the liquidators of Bank of Credit and Commerce International marched into court to accuse the Bank of England of dishonesty in the way that it supervised the maverick and now-defunct bank.

An array of former Bank governors and senior Bank officials, promised as witnesses in the historic trial, have yet to appear. Public seating, once packed with journalists and spectators, is largely empty. Only the legal bills clock resolutely upwards, running into tens of millions of pounds.

But if the trial has sunk from public gaze, the courtroom has been anything but quiet. Bank officials maintain a discreet silence on the progress of the case, but there was no disguising the glee of advisers last week as they watched the liquidators' lawyers struggle to persuade the judge about some of the allegations levelled against the Bank.

http://news.ft.com/cms/s/5725562e-7e2d-11d9-ac22-00000e2511c8.html

Edit:
"The expectation is that long-promised witnesses will start to take the stand in May or June. But if the Bank can argue that it has knocked out part of the liquidators' case, the number of people called could be reduced. It is also conceivable that the Bank could ask for some of the allegations to be formally dismissed.

As one adviser remarks: "This is a high stakes' game." With the Bank of England's reputation on the line and potential damages sought by the liquidators running to almost £1bn, that much, at least, is certain."

Of the 60 or so expert witnesses, all are voluntary specialists testifying on behalf of the liquidators.

Another 10 witnesses are expected to be subpoenaed - including Carlyle Group's John Major (EX UK PM).

From my personal involvement in the case I WELCOME this bravado by the BoE team.
Gloves are about to come off....

[emad]

1. Trial to "depend heavily on the evidence of witnesses":

"Mr Pollock, I am really concerned with what you are setting out to prove in this trial," remarked Mr Justice Tomlinson, as he paved the way for a long, testy exchange with the liquidators' lead barrister.

"This is an absolute shambles and the death-rattle of the case is getting louder," pronounced Nicholas Stadlen, QC, the Bank's senior counsel, when he finally got to his feet.

Outside the courtroom, the Bank's opponents remain publicly phlegmatic. "There are always ups and downs in long trials," says Christopher Grierson, the Lovells partner who has spearheaded the ground-breaking misfeasance claim for the liquidators.

"As it always has done, this trial will depend heavily on the evidence of the witnesses."

http://news.ft.com/cms/s/5725562e-7e2d-11d9-ac22-00000e2511c8.html

[Kagemusha]

2. Saying that 'principal place of business' doesn't have to be

the place where you actually do most of your business um... I'm not surprised the plaintiffs are surprised by it, because it's prima facia bullshit.

But if the judge rules that way the government's saved embarassment.