Global Brokerage (ex-FXCM Inc) builds “mega” defense in “mega” lawsuit

Maria Nikolova

The case, which involves 36 parties, including 19 defendants, slowly moves ahead at the New York Southern District Court, with the counsel for the defendants indicating a huge response to allegations is on its way.

FinanceFeeds has been keeping you up-to-date about the latest courtroom developments involving Global Brokerage Inc (NASDAQ:GLBR), formerly known as FXCM Inc, after the events from February 6, 2017 led to a wave of legal actions against the broker.

We have dubbed one of these actions a “mega” lawsuit, as it combines four class securities actions, and involves 36 parties, including 19 defendants.

Thus far, we have had information about the plaintiffs and their complaint but we have had no indication of any particular action taken by Global Brokerage (FXCM) with regard to its defense, although the company has pledged that it will “vigorously defend against the claims asserted in these actions”.

The past couple of days, however, have finally delivered some indications on Global Brokerage’s actions in response to the complaint in this “mega” lawsuit. Court documents, seen by FinanceFeeds, point to a “mega” defense being built by the broker.

Israel Dahan of King & Spalding LLP is taking the role of a Counsel for Defendants. The counsel has written to Judge Abrams, assigned to the case, informing him that the firm is representing all 19 defendants in the case: Global Brokerage, Inc. f/k/a FXCM Inc. (“FXCM”), Dror Niv, William Ahdout, David Sakhai, Eduard Yusupov, Janelle G. Lester, Robert Lande, Ornit Niv, Nicola Santoro, Jr., Margaret Deverell, David S. Sassoon, Kenneth Grossman, James Brown, Ryan Silverman, Arthur Gruen, Robin E. Davis, Eric LeGoff, Perry G. Fish, and Bryan Reyhani.

The defendants are gearing up to file a Motion to Dismiss and Memorandum in support of the Motion. Usually, such documents do not exceed 25 pages. King & Spalding LLP, however, requested that they file a document of up to 50 pages, as this will be a single memorandum on behalf of all of the defendants. Apparently, the fight will be complex and the arguments will be detailed.

The Judge has approved the request. We do not know for certain when FXCM’s counsel will file the motion to dismiss and the memorandum in support of the motion, but according to previous court filings, the Motions are due by August 3, 2017 and the Responses are due by September 18, 2017.

The “mega lawsuit” is a federal securities class action on behalf of a class consisting of all persons and entities who acquired publicly traded FXCM securities, including FXCM 2.25% Convertible Senior Notes due 2018 and Class A common stock from March 15, 2012 to February 6, 2017 (the “Class Period”). 683 Capital Partners, LP and Shipco Transport Inc. are lead plaintiffs. The plaintiffs purchased FXCM securities during the Class Period and were damaged when the February announcements were made by US regulators leading to the collapse in prices of these securities.

Under the complaint, FXCM’s failure to properly account for its arrangements with Effex Capital means that all of FXCM’s financial statements issued during the Class Period were false and misleading. Niv, Ahdout, and Lande are alleged to have disseminated or approved false statements and to have “employed devices, schemes and artifices to defraud”.

The complaint also states that the FXCM Notes should not have been introduced into the market because they were objectively unmarketable. “Where, as here, actors introduce an otherwise unmarketable security into the market by means of fraud, they have effectively manipulated the market”, the Complaint says.

Regarding the individual defendants, the Complaint states that each of them “was aware of or recklessly disregarded the fact that the false and misleading statements were being issued concerning the Company; and/or approved or ratified these statements in violation of the federal securities laws”.

The case is “In re Global Brokerage, Inc. f/k/a FXCM Inc. Securities Litigation” (1:17-cv-00916).

Read this next

Digital Assets

Bybit exits UK market ahead of regulatory changes

Bybit is suspending its cryptocurrency services for users in the United Kingdom due to impending regulations from the country’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA).

Digital Assets

Binance argues SEC trampled authority set by Congress

Binance, Binance.US, and Changpeng Zhao have jointly filed to dismiss a lawsuit brought by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in June.


Oscar Asly replaces Rasha Gad as CEO of M4Markets Dubai

Seychelles-regulated brokerage firm M4Markets has secured a license from the Dubai Financial Services Authority (DFSA) after it has already incorporated its new subsidiary in the Dubai International Financial Center (DIFC).

Retail FX

Capital Index UK reports mitigated loss despite revenue drop

FCA-regulated brokerage firm Capital Index (UK) Limited has released its annual financial report for the year 2022.

Digital Assets

Mike Novogratz’s Galaxy Digital expands in Europe

Galaxy Digital, the New York-based cryptocurrency financial services company founded by Mike Novogratz, is expanding its presence in Europe by appointing Leon Marshall as its first European CEO.

Metaverse Gaming NFT

Turingum Partners with MarketAcross to Drive Web3 Adoption in Global and Japanese Markets

Global blockchain PR leader MarketAcross joins forces with Japanese Web3 specialist Turingum to mutually expand its market reach, aiming to fortify Turingum’s worldwide footprint and MarketAcross’s presence in the lucrative Japanese blockchain landscape.

Digital Assets

Binance to delist all stablecoins in Europe next year

During a public hearing with the European Banking Authority (EBA), an executive from Binance said that the exchange could ultimately delist stablecoins from its European platforms by June 30, 2024.

Industry News

“Unconscionable conduct”: ASIC fines National Australia Bank $2.1m for overcharging customers

NAB faces a $2.1 million penalty for unconscionable conduct, as the Federal Court rules the bank knowingly overcharged customers, and took over two years to rectify the situation.