信用评级机构或面临新一轮诉讼

Credit rating agencies have faced intense scrutiny over the past few years. Blamed for being too generous in their ratings on complex derivatives that went sour during the financial crisis, they have struggled to repair their reputation.

过去几年，信用评级机构一直受到社会各界的密切关注。它们对复杂衍生品评级过于慷慨，而这些衍生品在金融危机中发生了问题，它们因此饱受批评，现在它们正在努力修补自身声誉。

Yesterday’s Australian court ruling that Standard and Poor’smisled 12 local councils in Australia by awarding a triple A rating to derivatives that collapsed in value less than two years after they were created by ABN Amro’s wholesale banking unit is being hailed as a landmark. It is a ruling that some lawyers argue will lead to copycat litigation against rating agencies in Europe and possibly the US.

近日澳大利亚法院判决标普(Standard and Poor's)的一项评级误导了当地12家地方委员会，该判决被外界认为是一个里程碑。标普对荷兰银行(ABN Amro)批发银行部门出售的衍生产品给出了AAA评级，但这些衍生品的价值在发售之后不到两年就严重缩水。一些律师指出，该判决将在欧洲甚至美国引发针对信用评级机构的跟风诉讼。

But the case – which focuses on the sale of constant proportion debt obligations sold to local councils by an intermediary in 2006 – also raises questions. Why is it that agencies including S and P, Moody’sand Fitch, which have faced controversy over their role in the rating of transactions at the heart of subprime crisis, have not been held to account elsewhere?

但这起诉讼本身同样引发了疑问。诉讼涉及2006年通过一家中介机构出售给澳大利亚地方委员会的“固定比例债务债券（Constant Proportion Debt Obligations，简称CPDO）。为什么标普、穆迪(Moody's)以及惠誉(Fitch)等机构，因其为处于次贷危机核心的交易给出的评级饱受争议，却未在其他地方被判应负法律责任？

Many cases have been brought. But the agencies have argued in the US that they act in a role that some describe as equivalent to a restaurant or film critic. The agencies say they offer ratings based on opinions, and as such they are protected by the US Constitution’s guarantee of free speech. Any research carries heavy disclaimers to that effect.

此前还有多起类似诉讼。但这些评级机构在美国的法庭上辩解称，他们所扮演的角色如同某些人形容的餐厅或者电影评论人。这些机构指出，它们基于自身观点给出评级，因此受美国宪法中的言论自由权保护。它们发布的任何研究报告都附有严格的免责声明。

Lawyers say all the agencies have long shown they will fight tooth and nail to defend this right and have shown they are successfully able to do this in the US and other jurisdictions.

律师们指出，所有评级机构长期以来都展现出了竭尽全力维护自身言论自由的决心，并在美国及其他地区成功地做到了这一点。

Roughly five dozen financial crisis cases have been filed against the agencies. Most were filed in the US and concerned securities linked to mortgage products. About a dozen were filed in Germany and Italy, mostly focusing on bonds and other products connected to Lehman.

目前约有60起针对评级机构的诉讼与金融危机有关，其中绝大部分是在美国提起的，涉及与抵押贷款产品相关的证券。约有12起诉讼是在德国和意大利提起的，主要涉及与雷曼兄弟(Lehman Brothers)相关的债券以及其他产品。

About 40 cases have been dismissed or withdrawn, although some of the dismissals are being appealed in higher courts. Another 20 cases, including about six in Italy and Germany, are moving through the courts.

约有40起诉讼遭法庭驳回或被原告主动撤销，其中部分遭驳回的案件目前正在向更高一级法院申诉。其余20起诉讼正在审理当中，其中有6起在意大利和德国。

Despite the record so far, some claim the Australian ruling could embolden others to launch cases.

虽然到目前为止的诉讼进展不尽如人意，但一些人指出，澳大利亚的这项判决可能使更多的人有勇气起诉评级机构。

IMF (Australia), a company that invests in litigation and funded the action, says it has retained lawyers to look at whether it would be appropriate to launch similar claims in Europe against S and P and the Royal Bank of Scotland, which owns ABN Amro’s wholesale banking arm, on behalf of European banks and pension funds if there is sufficient demand to make it commercially viable.

IMF (Australia)是一家投资于法律诉讼并为其提供资金支持的公司。该公司表示，已聘请律师研究，如果有足够的需求、有商业可行性，在欧洲代表欧洲的银行和养老基金，对标普及苏格兰皇家银行(RBS)提起类似诉讼是否行得通。荷兰银行的批发银行部门为苏格兰皇家银行所有。

John Walker, executive director of IMF (Australia), says the litigation company is proposing to fund claims in the Netherlands for European claimants in relation to CPDOs worth about €2bn sold by ABN Amro and rated by S and P, again subject to commercial viability.

IMF (Australia)执行董事约翰·沃克(John Walker)表示，该诉讼公司计划为在荷兰提起诉讼的欧洲地区原告提供资金，诉讼标的是由荷兰银行销售、标普评级的价值约20亿欧元的CPDO产品，但该计划最终是否付诸实施仍将取决于其在商业层面上的可行性。

James Cox, a Duke University law professor who has been following the litigation, says the Australian ruling could have some impact on US judges.

杜克大学(Duke University)法学教授詹姆斯·考克斯(James Cox)一直在跟踪澳大利亚的这起诉讼，他表示澳大利亚的判决结果可能对美国的法官造成影响。

“While courts generally are not expressly moved much by what happens abroad, the fact that suits are permitted to move forward in Australia and elsewhere reduces some of the force of the argument that if you impose liability on agencies in the US these transactions will just move off shore, Mr Cox says.

考克斯指出：“虽然法庭通常不会明显受到海外进展的影响，但澳大利亚及其他地区接受审理同类诉讼的事实，减弱了一种观点的说服力：如果在美国要求评级机构承担责任，评级活动将转移至海外。

Lawyers in Europe, meanwhile, say they are monitoring the case. However, they say successfully pursuing the agencies will be difficult under English or US law given that the circulars sent with any rating have clearly worded disclaimers.

与此同时，欧洲地区的律师则表示，他们一直在关注此案。但他们指出，在英美法系下，成功追究评级机构责任的难度较大，因为这些机构发表的任何评级报告都带有措辞明确的免责声明。

Added to that, it might be difficult for an investor to pursue a claim until it has established it has incurred a loss, something that could take time.

除此之外，投资者要想追索赔偿可能也较为困难，除非投资者能证明自己确实发生了损失，而这可能需要耗费较长时间。

“The other problem is whom the rating is addressed to. Normally that’s the issuer and not the bondholders. So then it becomes an issue of whether there was a duty of care to the bondholders, says one lawyer.

一名律师指出：“另一个问题在于信用评级报告是提供给谁的。通常来说，报告的对象是债券的发行者，而不是持有者。因此问题就变成了评级机构对于债券持有人是否负有勤勉义务。

S and P says it plans to appeal against the decision and rejects any suggestion its opinions were inappropriate. Moody’s and Fitch did not respond to requests for comment.

标普表示，将对澳大利亚法庭的判决提起上诉，并拒绝接受任何声称其评级建议不当的说法。穆迪和惠誉则未回应记者的置评请求。

The agencies have continued to express confidence in their model, pointing to a number of court victories in the US. They point out that, six years after the start of the financial crisis, statutes of limitations for bringing new claims are starting to shut the door to more lawsuits.

评级机构继续表示对自身模型有信心，并称已在美国的法庭上取得了多场胜利。它们指出，在金融危机爆发后的第六年，对提起新诉讼施加限制的法规正开始关闭此类诉讼的大门。

“It is highly unlikely that this Australian court opinion will have any significant impact elsewhere. The case does not involve mortgage-backed securities. And the ruling does not recognise – as courts in the US and elsewhere generally have – that ratings are opinions which are not actionable unless disbelieved by those that issued them, says Floyd Abrams, a lawyer for S and P.

标普的律师佛洛依德·艾布拉姆斯(Floyd Abrams)表示：“澳大利亚法庭的这项判决不太可能在其他地区造成重大影响。这起诉讼不涉及抵押贷款支持证券(MBS)。而且与美国及其他地区法院的通常做法不同，该判决不承认评级报告属于言论观点，因此除非报告作者并不相信文中观点，不得基于评级报告提起诉讼。

Moody’s spent just 15 minutes of its most recent investor day discussing legal claims. General counsel John Goggins rattled off reasons why “almost three dozen of the more than four dozen US ratings cases have been dismissed or withdrawn. “As we get closer to the six-year anniversary of the start of the credit crisis, it is going to get more difficult to bring these types of claims, he said.

穆迪在最近的一个投资者接待日仅花了15分钟讨论法律诉讼问题。该公司法律总顾问约翰·戈金斯(John Goggins)不假思索地解释了，为什么在美国对评级机构提起的约50起诉讼中，有近40起被法院拒绝受理或原告主动撤回。他说：“目前距离信贷危机爆发已近六年，提起此类诉讼的难度正进一步加大。

One unknown in the US remains the possibility of civil action by regulators, including the SEC and the Department of Justice, which are probing S and P’s ratings of structured products, according to a McGraw-Hill filing in July. The SEC has taken no enforcement actions over ratings, though two years ago it scolded Moody’s for considering the risk of reputational damage instead of just financial factors when deciding not to downgrade some derivatives in 2007.

美国当前仍不明朗的一点是，包括美国证交会(SEC)以及美国司法部(US Department of Justice)在内的监管当局是否会对评级机构提起民事诉讼；标普母公司麦格劳希尔(McGraw-Hill)7月提交的一份文件显示，这两家机构正在调查标普对结构化金融产品的评级情况。到目前为止美国证交会并未对评级机构采取强制行动，虽然两年前它曾批评穆迪在2007年决定不下调某些衍生品的评级时，参杂了对自身声誉风险的考虑，而不是只考虑金融因素。

Reporting by Mary Watkins, Brooke Masters, Stephen Foley and Neil Hume