What the Citi-Mercuria dispute revealed about Qingdao, metal financing

The arguments from banking firm Citi and trading company Mercuria over who should face the $270 million exposure from financing deals linked to metal held at Qingdao have now been heard, and the trial has drawn to a close, with a judgement due in January.

Aside from the central contractual issue, which turned on whether or not Citi had the right to claim early repayment of loans collateralised in Qingdao at the time the story broke, a number of facts emerged during the case. 1. It's not all over: this trial will not decide who will ultimately bear the losses from the alleged Qingdao fraud As well as setting the scene for various other lawsuits surrounding the alleged Qingdao fraud, the judge’s final ruling could have a considerable bearing on the future of financing transactions if he rules for Mercuria, and against Citi. But while the judgement will have important implications, it will not determine which company will ultimately bear the losses from the alleged fraud at Qingdao. “It may well be that there will be further proceedings between Citi and Mercuria once the position in China becomes clearer,” Citi said in court documents. If...

Published

Chloe Smith

December 12, 2014

04:00 GMT

London