FCA v. Philippe Moryoussef Individual (benchmark submission rigging, 2022)
Alleged — pending
These are allegations. FCA has filed an action; nothing in it has been proven, and the respondents have not been found liable. Everything described on this page is what the regulator alleges, not what a court has found. See our editorial policy.
Machine-extracted, pending human review. The structured fields on this page were parsed automatically from the regulator's own release, linked below. Read the primary document before relying on any figure here, and tell us if something is wrong.
In 2022, the Financial Conduct Authority brought an action against Philippe Moryoussef Individual, alleging conduct this library classifies as benchmark submission rigging. No monetary relief has been recorded at this stage; the matter is an allegation and remains unproven. A parallel criminal matter is referenced in the release.
The record
| Agency | FCA |
|---|---|
| Date filed | 2022-07-15 |
| Date resolved | 2022-07-15 |
| Status | filed |
| Criminal parallel | Yes |
| Defendants | Philippe Moryoussef Individual |
| Techniques | Benchmark submission rigging |
What was ordered
- Civil penalty
- —
- Disgorgement
- —
- Prejudgment interest
- —
- Total relief
- —
- Alleged gain
- —
What is alleged to have happened
the Financial Conduct Authority announced this matter on July 15, 2022. The respondents named are Philippe Moryoussef Individual (1 individual, 0 entities).
This library tags the matter as benchmark submission rigging, based on the conduct the regulator describes. Each tag links to a page explaining how that technique works, what statute it engages, and what penalties comparable actions have attracted. The tagging is ours, not the regulator's: agencies charge statutory provisions, not technique names.
The release references a parallel criminal proceeding. Where a criminal case exists, the civil and criminal outcomes are recorded separately, because they resolve on different standards of proof.
This matter is at the allegation stage. Nothing in the regulator's filing has been proven, and the respondents are entitled to the presumption that it has not been. This page will be updated if the matter is resolved, dismissed or withdrawn.
What technique is this, and how does it work?
This action is tagged with one technique in our taxonomy. The tagging is ours: regulators charge statutory provisions, not technique names, so the mapping is an editorial judgement described in our editorial policy.
- Benchmark submission rigging — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
Timeline
- 2022-07-15 FCA final notice
Primary documents
Everything on this page derives from the documents below. Where our summary and the primary document disagree, the primary document is right.
Related actions
Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.
| Action | Agency | Filed | Technique | Penalty | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SEC v. BlackRock Advisors, LLC (benchmark submission rigging, 2023) | SEC | 2023-10-24 | Benchmark Submission Rigging | — | settled |
| SEC v. Chatham Asset Management, LLC and Anthony Melchiorre (benchmark submission rigging, 2023) | SEC | 2023-04-03 | Benchmark Submission Rigging | $600k | settled |
| SEC v. The Bancorp, Inc. (benchmark submission rigging, 2022) | SEC | 2022-08-24 | Benchmark Submission Rigging | — | settled |
| FCA v. Colin Bermingham Individual (benchmark submission rigging, 2021) | FCA | 2021-09-27 | Benchmark Submission Rigging , Insider Trading | — | filed |
| OSC v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank (benchmark submission rigging, 2019) | OSC | 2019-08-26 | Benchmark Submission Rigging , Front Running +3 | — | settled |
| FCA v. Terry John Farr (benchmark submission rigging, 2019) | FCA | 2019-05-29 | Benchmark Submission Rigging , Wash Trading | — | judgment |