UT (Tax & Chancery) UT-2022-000134 UT-2022-000135 UT-2022-000137 - [2025] UKUT 00214 (TCC)

Mr Hill and Mr Barouti were the other two traders on the Desk. They traded in Core EGBs rather than Peripheral EGBs. They were both interviewed by the Authority in June 2018 and were asked about whether they heard anything suspicious between the Traders.

The Traders submitted that Mr Hill and Mr Barouti made it clear that they could overhear conversations between Mr Urra, Mr Lopez and Mr Sheth, but at no point heard anything suspicious which would suggest that the coordinated market abuse alleged by the Authority occurred. We were taken to parts of the transcripts of the interviews which supports this:

The Authority’s position was that there is no factual dispute about what Mr Hill and Mr Barouti saw and heard. It was, they said, common ground between the Authority and the Traders that they saw and heard nothing which led them to suspect that the Traders were engaged in anything untoward.

The Tribunal accepts that Mr Hill and Mr Barouti would be able to give evidence relevant to issues relating to collaboration between the Traders and what was seen and heard by others. The relevance of such evidence is not disputed by the Authority – instead the Authority says there is no relevant disagreement of fact. On that basis, the Tribunal finds that Mr Hill and Mr Barouti heard nothing which led them to suspect that the Traders were engaged in anything untoward.

Mr George also submitted that Mr Hill could give evidence in relation to the plausibility of the Information Discovery Strategy which was said to be pursued by Mr Urra (and Mr Sheth). That overlaps with submissions made in relation to Mr Heiberg and Mr Joshi, and is addressed alongside those individuals below.