Top and Current
Source : (remove) : reuters.com
RSSJSONXMLCSV
Top and Current
Source : (remove) : reuters.com
RSSJSONXMLCSV
Thu, January 15, 2026
Wed, January 14, 2026
Tue, January 13, 2026
Mon, January 12, 2026
Sat, January 10, 2026
Fri, January 9, 2026
Thu, January 8, 2026
Wed, January 7, 2026
Tue, January 6, 2026
Mon, January 5, 2026
Sun, January 4, 2026
Sat, January 3, 2026
Fri, January 2, 2026
Thu, January 1, 2026
Tue, December 30, 2025
Mon, December 29, 2025

Greensill Bank Sues UK Government for $441 Million

London, UK - January 15th, 2026 - Greensill Bank, the now-defunct lender once a prominent player in the rapidly expanding world of supply chain finance, has officially launched a legal challenge against the UK government, seeking a staggering GBP364 million (approximately $441 million) in damages. This lawsuit, filed this week, represents the latest chapter in the protracted saga surrounding Greensill's dramatic collapse and its far-reaching consequences for businesses across the UK and beyond.

The central issue revolves around a government-backed scheme established during the COVID-19 pandemic to provide loan guarantees and support businesses struggling with liquidity issues. Greensill Bank, eager to facilitate financing for its clients, heavily utilized this scheme, with the Bank of England acting as guarantor. However, the bank now alleges that the UK government's subsequent downgrading of Greensill's risk assessment directly precipitated significant financial losses and ultimately contributed to the bank's downfall.

The Core of the Dispute: Risk Assessment and Guarantee Scheme

The lawsuit meticulously details how Greensill Bank believed the government's initial assessment of the bank's risk profile was favorable, allowing it to secure crucial loan guarantees. The bank argues that the later, and seemingly abrupt, reassessment triggered a loss of confidence amongst investors and counterparties, leading to a cascading series of events culminating in the bank's insolvency. The guarantees were intended to reassure lenders and provide a safety net for businesses reliant on Greensill's financing. The bank claims this reassessment violated implicit understandings and agreements.

While the specific details of the risk assessment remain confidential and will likely be heavily scrutinized during the legal proceedings, it's clear the downgrade was a pivotal moment. Greensill's model was inherently reliant on maintaining a high level of trust and perceived stability. A sudden questioning of its financial viability proved devastating.

Government's Counter-Argument: Business Model Flaws

The UK government, unsurprisingly, disputes Greensill's claims vigorously. In a statement released shortly after the lawsuit was filed, government officials emphasized that Greensill's troubles were a result of inherent weaknesses in its business model and the high-risk strategies it pursued. They maintain that the government acted appropriately in reassessing the bank's risk profile and that any losses incurred were a direct consequence of Greensill's own actions and decisions, not government negligence. They are expected to argue that the guarantees were designed to protect businesses from a pandemic-induced downturn, not to shield Greensill from the consequences of its commercial choices.

This positions the case as a fundamental clash of perspectives - did the government act fairly and responsibly in assessing risk, or did it betray a confidence and responsibility it initially implied?

Ripple Effects and Potential Precedent

The Greensill collapse sent shockwaves throughout the global supply chain finance sector. Numerous businesses, particularly in the automotive and aerospace industries, were left scrambling to secure alternative financing after Greensill's sudden failure. The lawsuit isn't just about the GBP364 million at stake; it's about establishing legal precedent. A victory for Greensill could open the door for other companies to challenge government-backed guarantee schemes, potentially impacting future crisis response measures.

Experts are divided on the likely outcome. While Greensill's history and controversial business practices present a significant hurdle, the complexity of the guarantee scheme and the potential implications for government accountability make for a compelling legal battle. The case is expected to draw considerable attention from legal professionals and financial institutions, as it could significantly shape the legal landscape surrounding government interventions in commercial markets.

Looking Ahead

The lawsuit marks yet another twist in the Greensill story, a saga that began with promises of revolutionizing supply chain finance and ended in widespread financial disruption. As legal proceedings unfold, the world will be watching to see whether Greensill Bank can succeed in holding the UK government accountable, and what the ramifications will be for businesses and governments alike.


Read the Full reuters.com Article at:
[ https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/boards-policy-regulation/greensill-bank-suing-uk-government-441-million-over-covid-loan-guarantees-2026-01-15/ ]