Goldman Sachs Sued for $3.2 Million Over Failure to Cancel Derivatives

Castle World alleges that Goldman did not make reasonable efforts to cancel derivatives, leading to losses.

Goldman Sachs International is being sued for around $3.2 million. The company is alleged to have failed to cancel derivative contracts when instructed to. This supposedly led to the value of the contracts diminishing as the price of the underlying instrument fell. The claim has been filed in the London High Court by a company named Castle World Limited, located in the British Virgin Islands.

Register now to the London Summit 2017, Europe’s largest gathering of top-tier retail brokers and institutional FX investors

The company claims that it had instructed Goldman Sachs International (GSI) and Goldman Sachs Asia LLP (GSA) to cancel the derivatives and liquidate the positions on August 4, 2011, after its owner Jim Chiu Yen was arrested in Hong Kong on suspicion of bribery and money laundering offences.

The company alleges that Goldman failed to comply before the London market opened on August 5, 2011 either due to the non-transmission of the information from GSA to GSI or due to the failure of GSA to comply with the instructions.

The company said that this led to cumulative losses of around $1.1 million due to the failure to close the derivative positions based on the existing market prices. It had further losses of around $205,000 and $93,000 due to the failure of Goldman to make reasonable efforts to liquidate some bonds and funds.

The company also claims that Goldman failed to pay around $123,000 and $17,500 that is due it, contractually, from GSA.

Ultimately, it turned out that no charges were brought on Jim Chiu Yen, and the restraining order was also cancelled in 2014. So the company sued Goldman for failure to make reasonable efforts to terminate the derivative contracts, which lost value as time progressed. The losses accumulated over a period of time.

The case detailing the matter is Castle World Ltd. v. Goldman Sachs International, case number CL-2017-000477, in the Commercial Court of Queen’s Bench Division of the High Court of Justice of England and Wales.

Got a news tip? Let Us Know