9789176789568

Page 1

ISBN 978-91-7678-956-8

The_Liability_credit_hela.2.indd 1

The Liability of Credit Rating Agencies to Investors

tion of the global financial markets. They rate the ability of debtors to make timely interest payments and the likelihood of default. In the wake of the US subprime mortgage crisis, the credit rating industry sustained sharp criticism as it was revealed that they had systematically inflated ratings of mortgage-backed securities in the years prior to the crisis. As a result, investors that have suffered losses in the crisis filed lawsuits against the credit rating agencies. Furthermore, lawmakers in financial-centre-nations regulated the credit rating agencies extensively. This thesis analyses the liability of credit rating agencies to investors from a Swedish perspective. It identifies and analyses the applicable liability rules in Swedish private law and penal law. It also discusses central liability issues, namely the standard of care, degrees of negligence, legal causation, factual causation, and the credit rating agencies’ standard disclaimers. The thesis is of interest for legal practitioners and legal scholars dealing with issues pertaining to the liability of credit rating agencies.

Emil Nästegård

AAA CCC BBB D Ca Aa B3 Baa

CREDIT RATING AGENCIES are vital to the opera-

The Liability of Credit Rating Agencies to Investors A Swedish Perspective

Emil Nästegård

2015-12-22 21:53



The Liability of Credit Rating Agencies to Investors – A Swedish Perspective

Emil Nästegård


Contents Acknowledgements  5 Abbreviations  15 1 Introduction  19 1.1 1.2 1.3

1.4

Problem description  19 Purpose and research questions  23 Method and material  27 1.3.1 Introduction 27 1.3.2 Economic arguments  28 1.3.3 Equitable considerations and fairness assessments 29 1.3.4 Fact-based arguments  31 1.3.5 Comparative law  32 1.3.6 Methodological differences between private law and penal law  36 The legal systems discussed in this work  37 1.4.1 The common law tradition and the civil law tradition 37 1.4.2 The legal systems discussed in this work  37 1.4.2.1 The legal system of England  37 1.4.2.2 The legal system of the United States of America 38 1.4.2.3 The legal system of Australia  40 1.4.2.4 The legal system of Sweden and of other Scandinavian countries  41 1.4.2.5 The legal system of the EU  43

7


1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8

Delimitations and clarifications  44 Previous research  46 The choice of language  48 Terminological and conceptual remarks  50 1.8.1 General remarks  50 1.8.2 Terms and concepts  51 1.8.3 Certain case names  52 1.8.4 The concept ‘pure economic loss’  53 1.9 Structure 56

PART I: BACKGROUND  59 2 The Credit Rating Industry  61 2.1 The role of credit rating agencies  61 2.2 The forward-looking characteristic of credit ratings  65 2.3 The users of credit ratings  67 2.3.1 Institutional investors  67 2.3.1.1 A heterogeneous category of investors  67 2.3.1.2 The institutional investors’ internal investment policies  69 2.3.2 Other users of ratings  70 2.4 The dominant credit rating agencies  71 2.5 Minimum rating requirements in legal rules  74 2.6 The transition to the issuer-pays business model  78 2.7 The credit rating process  80 2.8 Default correlation studies  83 2.9 The insurance situation in CRA liability cases  84 2.10 Summary and conclusions  88

3 Financial Crises and CRA Regulatory Reforms  89 3.1 The malfunctioning reputational capital model  89 3.2 The CRAs’ role in the US subprime mortgage crisis  91 3.3 The CRA regulatory reforms  99 3.3.1 Measures at the global level  99 3.3.2 Regulatory reforms in the US  100 8


3.4

3.3.3 Regulatory reforms in the EU  106 3.3.3.1 Background  106 3.3.3.2 Regulation (EC) No 1060/2009  107 3.3.3.3 The amending regulations  108 3.3.3.4 An overview of Regulation (EC) No 1060/2009 (including the two amending regulations)  111 Summary and conclusions  121

PART II: THE LIABILITY RULES  123 4 Article 35a of Regulation (EC) No 1060/2009  125 4.1 Background 125 4.2 Article 35a as adopted by the European Parliament and the Council of the EU  128 4.3 Two classes of claimants  130 4.4 The standard of fault  130 4.5 Annex III and the concept ‘impact’  132 4.6 The concept ‘reasonably relied’  133 4.7 Disclaimers 135 4.8 Article 35a’s dependence on the national laws of the Member States  136 4.9 The burden of proof  137 4.10 Further civil liability claims  140 4.11 ESMA fines  141 4.12 Summary and conclusions  142

5 The Reasonable Reliance Principle in Swedish Law  145 5.1 A historical overview: quasi-contracts  145 5.2 An extra-contractual theory of reasonable reliance  149 5.2.1 The Tort Liability Act  149 5.2.2 The requirement ‘criminal behaviour’  150 5.2.3 Extra-contractual liability for professional negligent misstatements  152 5.2.4 Reasonable reliance as the ground for liability  156 9


5.3

5.2.5 Rule VI.-2:207 of the DCFR  160 5.2.6 Is the change in legal techniques of any practical relevance? 161 5.2.7 Recent case law  162 Summary and conclusions  167

6 Liability Rules in Penal Law  170 6.1 Introduction 170 6.2 Swindling 171 6.2.1 The second paragraph of Article 9 of Chapter 9 of the Penal Code of 1962  171 6.2.2 Criminal liability and vicarious liability  173 6.2.3 Published or disseminated information  175 6.2.4 The recipients of the information  176 6.2.5 The nature of the information  177 6.2.6 The subjective element  178 6.3 Market manipulation  179 6.3.1 The second paragraph of Article 8 of the Financial Instruments Trading (Market Abuse Penalties) Act 179 6.3.2 ’Trading on the securities market or otherwise’  182 6.3.3 ’Intended to affect or mislead’  182 6.3.4 Market manipulation compared to swindling  184 6.3.5 Vicarious liability and criminal liability  185 6.4 Summary and conclusions  185

PART III: COMPLETING A CAUSE OF ACTION  189 7 Legal Causation  191 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5

10

Introduction 191 The adequate cause doctrine  191 The Scandinavian unlawfulness doctrine  195 The scope of the rule doctrine  197 The Anglo-American floodgates argument  199 7.5.1 Introduction 199


7.5.2 Foreseeability 202 7.5.3 Practical manageability  203 7.5.4 Proportionality 208 7.6 The proximate relationship between the disputing parties  209 7.7 Summary and conclusions  212

8 The Circle of Protected Recipients  214 8.1 Introduction 214 8.2 Swedish law  215 8.3 Foreign law  220 8.3.1 Europe and Australia  220 8.3.2 The United States of America  225 8.3.2.1 § 552 of the Restatement (Second) of Torts  225 8.3.2.2 Linking conduct  233 8.3.3 Secondary market investors  236 8.4 Summary and conclusions  240

9 The Standard of Care  242 9.1 Introduction 242 9.2 Is the civil liability of CRAs professional liability?  244 9.3 Standards of conduct for CRAs  248 9.3.1 Introduction 248 9.3.2 Regulation (EC) No 1060/2009  249 9.3.2.1 Annex III  249 9.3.2.2 The concept ‘impact’  250 9.3.2.3 Infringements relating to obstacles to the supervisory activities  252 9.3.2.4 Infringements relating to disclosure provisions 252 9.3.2.5 Infringements relating to organisational requirements 254

11


9.4

9.5

9.3.2.6 Infringements relating to operational requirements 255 9.3.2.7 Infringements relating to conflicts of interest 268 9.3.3 The IOSCO Code of Conduct Fundamentals for Credit Rating Agencies  271 9.3.3.1 Introduction  271 9.3.3.2 The IOSCO CRA Code of Conduct  274 9.3.3.3 The implementation of the IOSCO CRA Code of Conduct in the EU  276 9.3.4 Can the EU Regulation and the IOSCO Code of Conduct be regarded as the good practice for CRAs?  279 9.3.5 The purposes of the public law framework  280 9.3.6 The nature of the individual public law rules  283 The degrees of negligence  285 9.4.1 Introduction 285 9.4.2 Ordinary negligence  285 9.4.3 Gross negligence  286 9.4.4 Some thoughts on the distinction between ordinary and gross negligence  289 Summary and conclusions  291

10 Disclaimers  295 10.1 Introduction  295 10.2 Article 35a(3)  296 10.3 Moody’s and S&P’s standard disclaimers  297 10.3.1 Introduction  297 10.3.2 No responsibility for external sources  298 10.3.3 Statements of opinion, not statements of fact  299 10.3.4 Not investment advice, warranties or recommendations 302 10.3.5 Are the standard disclaimers exclusions or limitations? 304 10.4 Reasonable and proportionate limitations  305 10.4.1 General remarks  305 12


10.4.2 Monetary limitations  308 10.4.3 Limiting liability for ordinary negligence  310 10.5 Summary and conclusions  312

11 Factual Causation  314 11.1 Introduction  314 11.2 Recent case law  315 11.3 The hypothetical question in CRA liability cases  319 11.4 The role of minimum rating requirements in the test of factual causation  321 11.5 The institutional investors’ own credit risk assessments  322 11.5.1 ‘Reasonably relied’  322 11.5.2 The information on which the investor’s own credit risk assessment is based  324 11.5.3 Different scenarios  326 11.5.3.1 Introduction  326 11.5.3.2 Scenario 1  328 11.5.3.3 Scenario 2  331 11.5.3.4 Scenario 3  333 11.5.3.5 Scenario 4  340 11.5.3.6 Scenario 5  342 11.6 Summary and conclusions  342

PART IV: CONCLUSIONS  349 12 Conclusions  351

PART V: EXCURSUS  369 13 The First Amendment Defence in US Law  371 14 Democratic Aspects on the Credit Rating Industry  377 Appendices  383 Appendix I: Moody’s standard disclaimer  383 Appendix II: S&P’s standard disclaimer  387 13


Bibliography  390 Literature 390 Legislative assemblies, public authorities, and international standard setters  414 Companies and other private organisations  423 Other sources  425

Legislation, Model Rules and Treaties  427 Table of Cases  433

14


ISBN 978-91-7678-956-8

The_Liability_credit_hela.2.indd 1

The Liability of Credit Rating Agencies to Investors

tion of the global financial markets. They rate the ability of debtors to make timely interest payments and the likelihood of default. In the wake of the US subprime mortgage crisis, the credit rating industry sustained sharp criticism as it was revealed that they had systematically inflated ratings of mortgage-backed securities in the years prior to the crisis. As a result, investors that have suffered losses in the crisis filed lawsuits against the credit rating agencies. Furthermore, lawmakers in financial-centre-nations regulated the credit rating agencies extensively. This thesis analyses the liability of credit rating agencies to investors from a Swedish perspective. It identifies and analyses the applicable liability rules in Swedish private law and penal law. It also discusses central liability issues, namely the standard of care, degrees of negligence, legal causation, factual causation, and the credit rating agencies’ standard disclaimers. The thesis is of interest for legal practitioners and legal scholars dealing with issues pertaining to the liability of credit rating agencies.

Emil Nästegård

AAA CCC BBB D Ca Aa B3 Baa

CREDIT RATING AGENCIES are vital to the opera-

The Liability of Credit Rating Agencies to Investors A Swedish Perspective

Emil Nästegård

2015-12-22 21:53


Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.