Latest news with #legalvictory
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Judge denies request seeking to make Fed's FOMC rate meeting public this week
The Federal Reserve won a legal victory Monday when a federal judge denied a request for a temporary restraining order compelling the central bank's Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) to open its rate deliberations to the public starting Tuesday and Wednesday. The request came as part of a lawsuit filed by money manager Azoria Capital against FOMC Chair Jerome Powell and other central bank policymakers in a Washington, D.C., federal court. The lawsuit alleged the Fed was violating a 1976 federal law by keeping its monetary policy meetings behind closed doors. Azoria Capital is led by CEO James Fishback, who is close to the Trump administration and served as an adviser to the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). It argued that the Fed, by keeping its meetings closed to the public, was in violation of the Government in the Sunshine Act of 1976, passed after President Richard Nixon's Watergate scandal roiled Washington and led to calls for increased transparency in the US government. The act requires federal agencies to keep their meetings open to the public. But a federal judge in Washington, D.C., Beryl Howell, ruled that the Sunshine Act does not apply to the FOMC because the FOMC is not an agency and is instead a "composite of several parts." The FOMC is comprised of Fed governors, who are appointed by the president, and regional Fed presidents, who are appointed by banks in their respective districts. Fishback, Azoria's CEO, noted in a statement after the hearing that the judge did not dismiss its entire case, "meaning Azoria's case for transparency and accountability from the Federal Reserve will proceed." "Azoria looks forward to continuing our case and fighting for transparency and accountability for all Americans." The lawsuit filed last week was one of several headaches for the Fed as the White House continues to pressure the central bank, highlighted by an unusual presidential visit to the central bank for a tour of the $2.5 billion refurbishment of its National Mall buildings. Trump and other administration officials have criticized the project for its cost overruns. Trump and other top White House officials have also been hammering Powell for months over his wait-and-see rate stance and his insistence that more time is needed to assess how the president's tariffs will affect the path of inflation. Traders widely expect the Fed's Federal Open Market Committee to defy Trump and once again keep rates unchanged this Wednesday as the FOMC has for every other meeting so far in 2025. The market expects the first cut of 2025 to happen on Sept. 17, the third-to-last meeting of the year. Read more: How the Fed rate decision affects your bank accounts, loans, credit cards, and investments But at least two of Powell's colleagues are warming to Trump's near-term rate cut call, which could produce some disagreement this week behind closed doors in Washington. Click here for in-depth analysis of the latest stock market news and events moving stock prices Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Judge denies request seeking to make Fed's FOMC rate meeting public this week
The Federal Reserve won a legal victory Monday when a federal judge denied a request for a temporary restraining order compelling the central bank's Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) to open its rate deliberations to the public starting Tuesday and Wednesday. The request came as part of a lawsuit filed by money manager Azoria Capital against FOMC Chair Jerome Powell and other central bank policymakers in a Washington, D.C., federal court. The lawsuit alleged the Fed was violating a 1976 federal law by keeping its monetary policy meetings behind closed doors. Azoria Capital is led by CEO James Fishback, who is close to the Trump administration and served as an adviser to the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). It argued that the Fed, by keeping its meetings closed to the public, was in violation of the Government in the Sunshine Act of 1976, passed after President Richard Nixon's Watergate scandal roiled Washington and led to calls for increased transparency in the US government. The act requires federal agencies to keep their meetings open to the public. But a federal judge in Washington, D.C., Beryl Howell, ruled that the Sunshine Act does not apply to the FOMC because the FOMC is not an agency and is instead a "composite of several parts." The FOMC is comprised of Fed governors, who are appointed by the president, and regional Fed presidents, who are appointed by banks in their respective districts. Fishback, Azoria's CEO, noted in a statement after the hearing that the judge did not dismiss its entire case, "meaning Azoria's case for transparency and accountability from the Federal Reserve will proceed." "Azoria looks forward to continuing our case and fighting for transparency and accountability for all Americans." The lawsuit filed last week was one of several headaches for the Fed as the White House continues to pressure the central bank, highlighted by an unusual presidential visit to the central bank for a tour of the $2.5 billion refurbishment of its National Mall buildings. Trump and other administration officials have criticized the project for its cost overruns. Trump and other top White House officials have also been hammering Powell for months over his wait-and-see rate stance and his insistence that more time is needed to assess how the president's tariffs will affect the path of inflation. Traders widely expect the Fed's Federal Open Market Committee to defy Trump and once again keep rates unchanged this Wednesday as the FOMC has for every other meeting so far in 2025. The market expects the first cut of 2025 to happen on Sept. 17, the third-to-last meeting of the year. Read more: How the Fed rate decision affects your bank accounts, loans, credit cards, and investments But at least two of Powell's colleagues are warming to Trump's near-term rate cut call, which could produce some disagreement this week behind closed doors in Washington. Click here for in-depth analysis of the latest stock market news and events moving stock prices Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
The Guardian
6 days ago
- Politics
- The Guardian
Caribbean leaders hail ICJ climate ruling as ‘historic' win for small island states
Leaders in the Caribbean have hailed the outcome of the international court of justice (ICJ) climate change case as a 'historic legal victory' for small island states everywhere. Several countries in the region had provided evidence to the ICJ case, which ended this week with a landmark advisory opinion that could see states ordered to pay reparations if they fail to tackle fossil fuels and prevent harm to the climate system. Describing the opinion as a 'historic legal victory for small states' that are bearing the worst impacts of climate change, the prime minister of St Vincent and the Grenadines (SVG), Ralph Gonsalves, told the Guardian it would strengthen the Caribbean's negotiating power. 'What is very interesting is that it says that the obligations laid out in the important [climate change] treaties are not simply procedural,' he said. 'They create substantive legal obligations.' In recent years the Caribbean has been plagued by a string of catastrophic hurricanes. Last year Hurricane Beryl demolished more than 90% of buildings in parts of multi-island SVG and left thousands homeless and without running water, electricity and food. Gonsalves said the advisory opinion – which said a clean, healthy and sustainable environment is a human right – connects climate action treaties such as the Paris agreement to other international laws such as those governing human rights. Echoing Gonsalves' sentiments, the Bahamas' attorney general, Ryan Pinder, praised the ICJ for taking a 'very strong position' that allowed countries to 'speak and argue about the adverse effects of the climate crisis on its people' and potentially provided more legal options to small states. 'It certainly opens up the positions of … states like the Bahamas to go into other areas of the United Nations and other multilateral institutions that are human rights-focused,' he told the Guardian. Referring to the catastrophic Hurricane Dorian in 2019, which killed more than 70 people and caused an estimated US$3.4bn worth of damage, Pinder said: '[This] had a significant impact on the human rights of our people, whether that be displacement … the right to an adequate standard of living … [or] access to food, water and housing. 'All of those are fundamental human rights that the ICJ has now recognised as a significant component of the adverse effects of climate change.' The advisory opinion's focus on reparations, he said, was important for the Bahamas, because it was about the obligation of major polluters to restore a country and its assets if it suffered the effects of a climate change-related disaster. Human rights and climate justice lawyer Nikki Reisch said it was possible to connect devastating climatic events to climate change and to the states responsible and pursue justice. 'The science on attribution and causation is strong and only getting stronger. The court made clear that there is no technical barrier to connecting climate destruction to its causes, to the continued pollution from fossil fuels and destruction of carbon sinks,' she said. 'The science is there, and this decision confirms that the law is too.' Reisch added that countries were responsible for past and present environmental breaches. 'The court really rejected the attempts of the biggest cumulative emitters like the United States and others to sweep history under the rug and ignore the decades of climate destruction, of fossil fuel production and pollution, of colonialism that laid the foundations for the devastation that climate change is wreaking in so many parts of the world.' In the UK, some MPs criticised the ICJ opinion, with the shadow foreign secretary, Priti Patel, describing it on X as a 'mad' decision, adding that the ICJ had 'lost its core purpose and is now joining political campaigns and bandwagons'. Dr Justin Sobion, who coordinated the Caribbean's ICJ submissions, said the opinion was an interpretation of climate obligations under international law, including global agreements that countries such as the UK – which recognise there is a climate emergency – have ratified. Pinder said: 'I'm not sure, given some of the commentary we've seen from larger developed countries and countries that were in the Industrial Revolution, that [the ICJ advisory] is really going to change their opinions.' He added that the 'rather unfortunate' comments from some political leaders in the UK on the ICJ opinion indicated that 'multilateralism is still going to be a significant challenge'. Pinder and Gonsalves said their countries were reviewing the ICJ opinion – which UN member states instructed the ICJ to produce in 2023 after years of campaigning by Pacific island law students and diplomacy led by Vanuatu – and considering how to work with other countries in the region on next steps. 'This has given us an excellent platform,' Gonsalves said. 'We have … to follow through with some heavy lifting, to do negotiations. At the end of the day, this is about life, living and production for all of us on planet Earth.'
Yahoo
21-07-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Repeat Offender Ryanair Again Convicted for Unlawful Competition and Denigration Against eDreams ODIGEO
Court finds Ryanair guilty of unlawful campaign of untruthful claims against eDO and orders the cease and removal of all denigrating statements. Ryanair ordered by the Court to issue a public retraction recognising that eDreams Prime offers discounts to consumers. This ruling follows interim measures issued by the same Court last year, which were disobeyed by Ryanair, leading to an unprecedented criminal warning against the airline. BARCELONA, Spain, July 21, 2025--(BUSINESS WIRE)--eDreams ODIGEO (hereinafter, 'the Company' or 'eDO'), the world's leading travel subscription company, today welcomed yet another significant legal victory against Ryanair. The Barcelona Commercial Court No. 12 found Ryanair D.A.C. guilty of unlawful competition and denigration against eDO, adding to the airline's extensive track record of convictions for this illegal behaviour. The ruling conclusively established that Ryanair's denigrating claims about eDO and its Prime subscription, part of an aggressive and continued campaign initiated by the airline in 2023, are untrue. As the Court noted, this campaign was disseminated through Ryanair's websites, press releases, social media, and in public statements from its top executives, including Ryanair CEO Michael O'Leary. The ruling found that these claims were in reality issued with the aim of undermining a key competitor. Consequently, the Court has issued a permanent injunction obligating Ryanair to cease its denigratory campaign, remove all denigratory content from all platforms, and issue a public retraction. Ryanair forced to publicly admit eDreams Prime offers savings after years of untruthful claims As a significant remedy, the Court has mandated that Ryanair publish a public retraction on its own website and social media channels for a period of six months. This forced retraction explicitly requires Ryanair to admit the value of eDreams Prime after its years-long campaign denigrating the service with claims now deemed illegal and untrue. Notably, the Court orders Ryanair to publish: "Ryanair recognises that eDreams Prime is a legitimate subscription service that offers consumers savings on flights, hotels, packages and car rentals." This decision follows an interim order from the same Court last summer. In that prior ruling, the Court had already found Ryanair's attacks to be a "perfectly organised campaign designed to promote the Ryanair website for booking flights and associated services" and ordered the airline to immediately cease its conduct. However, in a display of defiance, Ryanair repeatedly breached those measures and continued its smear campaign, which ultimately led the Court to issue a formal criminal warning against the airline for disobedience, warning of potential criminal charges if its conduct continued. Ryanair's appeal of these interim measures was also fully rejected by a higher court, the Provincial Court of Barcelona. In its June decision and based on evidence presented, the higher court stated that in "the majority of cases, [eDreams Prime prices] are more advantageous than those offered by Ryanair." The Provincial Court therefore rejected the appeal, concluding that with the "available evidence it cannot be sustained that the offensive claims used by Ryanair are truthful." This latest legal victory by eDreams ODIGEO also builds upon a previous definitive ruling from Spain's Supreme Court—a decision reached after Ryanair's appeals were systematically rejected at all prior court instances—which had already mandated Ryanair to cease its denigrating and anti-competitive behaviour towards eDreams ODIGEO. Ryanair has also been convicted for denigrating actions and unfair competition against other independent travel agents. Guillaume Teissonnière, General Counsel at eDreams ODIGEO said: "For Ryanair, this must feel like a broken record. 'Déjà vu' doesn't even begin to cover it. Time and again, courts have resoundingly condemned their denigration tactics. Their motive is transparent: to unfairly crush competition. Enough is truly enough. Ryanair must finally abandon these bullying methods, compete fairly on the merits and adhere to the law. It's long overdue." eDreams ODIGEO remains dedicated to upholding fair competition within the travel industry and safeguarding the interests of travellers. -ENDS- View source version on Contacts E: edreamspressoffice@ T: +(44)07876745530 / +(44)2074572383 Inicia sesión para acceder a tu cartera de valores
Bloomberg
17-07-2025
- Business
- Bloomberg
Samsung Billionaire Lee's Acquittal Upheld by Korea's Top Court
Samsung Electronics Co. Executive Chairman Jay Y. Lee was cleared of all charges related to accounting fraud and stock manipulation by South Korea's Supreme Court, marking a major legal victory for the billionaire head of the world's largest electronics empire. The top court on Thursday upheld a Seoul High Court ruling that acquitted Lee and other Samsung officials of all 19 charges stemming from the 2015 merger of Samsung C&T Corp. and Cheil Industries Inc. Prosecutors alleged the deal helped Lee cement his control over the conglomerate.
