menu

Homepage > News > Court acquies Citadel, Robinhood and the other GameStop brokers

Court acquies Citadel, Robinhood and the other GameStop brokers


A US court dismissed a months-long lawsuit accusing several retail brokers, a clearinghouse and a market maker of conspiring to restrict trading in GameStop stocks.

Citadel and other companies named in the lawsuit publicly celebrated the decision of Judge Cecilia Altonaga. However, a large group of investors still believe that they worked together to break the WallStreetBets pump. A federal court in Miami said an investigation into January’s GameStop share purchase restriction did not reveal a collusive outcome. The civil case has been discontinued, but the plaintiffs have until December 20 to file a corrected complaint.

We are glad that the court has admitted that there are no grounds for the conspiracy theory and that it has temporarily dismissed the case, – commented Citadel Securities in a statement.

Objections from investors

According to the group of investors behind the lawsuit, market makers buying order flows from Robinhood, and other retail brokers instructed them to suspend or restrict trading in GameStop shares. This was intended to create a situation where Citadel Securities could suppress a rally initiated by the Reddit WallStreetBets subforum and limit its losses.

However, the court found no convincing direct evidence of a conspiracy, stating that analysis of the reasons cannot replace individual or collective wrongdoing evidence. The lawsuit authors pointed out that Citadel Securities was paying for the order flow to execute more than half of the Robinhood transactions. 34% of the trading platform’s revenues came from this source. In the case of the Apex clearing house, Citadel paid for the execution of more than 23% of orders for shares on the S & P500 index. The lawsuit also lists the brokers E * Trade Securities and Interactive Brokers.

Plaintiffs also cited communications between Apex and Robinhood, in which the first warned the broker that retail investors had found a loophole in his trading restrictions on GameStop shares. However, the judge found that helping a competitor prevent unfair conduct did not violate antitrust law.

Author: Izabela Kamionka

Are you a trader?

Help others and rate your broker! Use the search engine or find your broker on the list.



Ad:

Last news:

FCA's Executive Director says the number of frauds will continue to increase

FCA warns against remote desktop fraud

UK financial regulator has warned again against desktop sharing scams. As of July 2020, 2,142 ...
Read More
Criminals cheat victims by promising to help them recover their money

Criminals cheat victims by promising to help them recover their money

Australian Scamwatch warns against offers of upfront recovery assistance. These types of scams target people ...
Read More
British court blocks class action against banks

British court blocks class action against banks

The Competition Court of Appeal (CAT) in London blocked a planned forex class action lawsuit ...
Read More
FX trading volume on the Moscow Stock Exchange fell 28.6% in March

FX trading volume on the Moscow Stock Exchange fell 28.6% in March

On Monday, the Moscow Exchange (MOEX), the largest stock exchange group in Russia, published turnover ...
Read More

Add a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

 

Note: Opinions and posts on ForexRev.com represent personal opinions and views of their respective authors and should not be interpreted as recommendations to purchase or sell securities. ForexRev.org assumes no responsibility or liability for such content.
Go to top