FCA v. Martin Brokers (UK) Ltd (Martins) (benchmark submission rigging, 2014)
Settled
Checked against the primary document on October 2, 2026. The library's summary, tags and figures for this record were compared with the regulator's own document by an AI model (Claude) following written instructions, with sampled and disputed records read a second time. No lawyer has reviewed them. A checked record can still contain errors, and checked does not mean endorsed. See how we check records or report a correction.
In 2014, the Financial Conduct Authority settled an action with Martin Brokers (UK) Ltd (Martins). The final notice finds the broker helped a derivatives trader influence yen LIBOR, including by submitting false orders to sway panel banks' views. The penalty is £630,000: a £3.6 million fine was cut by 75% for the firm's finances, then reduced by a 30% settlement discount. The release records a penalty of GBP 630,000.
The record
| Agency | FCA |
|---|---|
| Date filed | 2014-05-15 |
| Date resolved | 2014-05-15 |
| Status | settled |
| Venue | OTC |
| Criminal parallel | No |
| Defendants | Martin Brokers (UK) Ltd (Martins) |
| Techniques | Benchmark submission rigging , Price manipulation , Spoofing , Wash trading |
What was ordered
- Civil penalty
- —
- Disgorgement
- —
- Prejudgment interest
- —
- Total relief
- —
- Alleged gain
- —
- Penalty as published
- £630k
What is alleged to have happened
the Financial Conduct Authority announced this matter on May 15, 2014. The respondent named is Martin Brokers (UK) Ltd (Martins) (0 individuals, 1 entity).
This library tags the matter as benchmark submission rigging, price manipulation, spoofing and wash trading, 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 final notice finds the broker helped a derivatives trader influence yen LIBOR, including by submitting false orders to sway panel banks' views. The penalty is £630,000: a £3.6 million fine was cut by 75% for the firm's finances, then reduced by a 30% settlement discount.
The conduct is recorded against unclassified instruments, with OTC identified in the release.
The relief recorded in our data is a penalty of GBP 630,000. Penalty and disgorgement are distinct: disgorgement returns the gain, while the penalty is punitive. We store them separately so that aggregate figures across the library are not double-counted.
For the regulator's own account of the facts, read the primary document linked above. This page deliberately summarises the structured record rather than reproducing the release.
What technique is this, and how does it work?
This action is tagged with 4 techniques 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.
- Price manipulation — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
- Spoofing — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
- Wash trading — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
Timeline
- 2014-05-15 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.