Anwar et al v. Fairfield Greenwich Limited et al

Filing 1046

JOINDER to join re: #1044 Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Motion,. Document filed by CITCO Bank Nederland N.V. Dublin Branch, CITCO Fund Services (Europe) B.V., Citco Canada Inc., Citco Fund Services (Bermuda) Limited, Citco Group Limited, Citgo Global Custody N.V.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A)(Feinberg, Dyanne)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
ANWAR, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
- v-

Master File No. 09-cv-118 (VM)

FAIRFIELD GREENWICH LIMITED, et al.,
Defendants.
This Document Related To: All Actions

THE CITCO DEFENDANTS’ JOINDER IN THE LIMITED OBJECTIONS
OF PWC CANADA AND PWC NETHERLANDS TO
PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR FINAL SETTLEMENT APPROVAL

Defendants, Citco Fund Services (Europe) B.V., Citco (Canada) Inc., Citco Bank
Nederland N.V. Dublin Branch, Citco Global Custody N.V., Citco Fund Services (Bermuda)
Limited, and The Citco Group Limited (collectively, the “Citco Defendants”), hereby join in
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (“PwC Canada”) and PricewaterhouseCoopers Accountants N.V.
(“PwC Netherlands”) (together, the “PwC Defendants”)’s Limited Objections to Plaintiffs’
Motion for Final Settlement Approval (“the PwC Defendants’ Objections”).
For the reasons set forth in the PwC Defendants’ Objections, the Citco Defendants object
to Paragraph 17 and Paragraph 21 of the Preliminary Approval Order, to the extent that these
provisions are to be included in the Court’s Final Approval Order. 1 The Citco Defendants, like
the PwC Defendants, have standing to assert their objections where they are able to demonstrate

1

As of the deadline for filing this objection, February 15, 2012, the Settling Parties have not
proffered a Final Approval Order for consideration by the parties or the Court.

that they will sustain “formal legal prejudice as a result of the settlement.” (See the PwC
Defendants’ Objections, p. 6, citations omitted). The PwC Defendants point out that they have
been served with a complaint filed by a number of purported Fairfield Sentry investors in the
Netherlands, and have argued in that proceeding that the Dutch Court should dismiss the claims
against the PwC Defendants on various grounds, including that certain plaintiffs in that case are
putative class members in this case. (Id., p. 5).
Similarly, certain of the Citco Defendants have been sued in the Court of Amsterdam, the
Netherlands, in a proceeding initiated on December 1, 2010, by Stichting Fairfield Compensation
Foundation (“the Foundation”), as well as investors Colima International Limited and Merus
Trident Trust Company (BVI) Limited.

The Foundation purports to represent over 690

beneficial owners of shares of the Fairfield Sentry and Sigma funds. In this proceeding, the
named Citco Defendants also argued that the claims against them should be dismissed or stayed
because the plaintiffs in that action are putative class members in this case. By Judgment dated
February 6, 2013, the Netherlands Court declined to dismiss or stay the action, stating: “That the
class action procedure will be successful … is not certain. Nor is it certain that the Investors,
Colima and Merus, will then be granted compensation…”). (A copy of the Judgment and an
English translation are attached hereto as Exhibit “A”).
For the same reasons set forth in the PwC Defendants’ Objections, it is inequitable to
permit foreign investors to reap the benefits of a settlement by one set of defendants in this
action without submitting to the jurisdiction of this Court and being bound by all aspects of this
litigation. Should foreign investors, including the 690-plus investors represented by the
Foundation, file Proofs of Claim in the U.S. action in order to benefit from the proposed
Settlement, these investors should be deemed to have submitted to the jurisdiction of the U.S.

2

Court with respect to their claims against the Citco Defendants as well. 2 Paragraph 17 of the
Preliminary Approval Order, to the extent it is incorporated into any final order, would unfairly
preclude that argument in this Court.
The Citco Defendants further object to Paragraph 21 of the Preliminary Approval Order,
to the extent it is incorporated into any final order, as it would prevent the Citco Defendants from
becoming aware that these investors did in fact file a Proof of Claim, and of any amounts
claimed or paid pursuant to the Proof of Claim.

This would not only preclude the Citco

Defendants from having the information from which to argue that these investors have submitted
themselves to the jurisdiction of the U.S. Court, but would also preclude the Citco Defendants
from making a claim that any sums received by them would be a set-off to any damages in the
U.S. or the Netherlands proceedings.
Accordingly, and for the additional reasons set out in the PwC Defendants’ Objections,
the Citco Defendants respectfully submit that any Order issued by the Court approving the
proposed settlement should not contain the language proposed in Paragraphs 17 or 21 of the
Preliminary Approval Order.

2

In that the plaintiffs in the Netherlands proceeding are not suing any of the settling defendants,
it is likely that they will seek to participate in the distribution of these settlement payments in the
U.S.
3

Dated: February 15, 2013.

Respectfully submitted,
BROWN AND HELLER, P.A.

/s/ Dyanne E. Feinberg
Lewis N. Brown
Dyanne E. Feinberg
Terence M. Mullen
Amanda M. McGovern
Elizabeth Izquierdo
One Biscayne Tower, 15th Floor
2 South Biscayne Boulevard
Miami, FL 33131
T: 305.358.3580
[e-mail]
PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND, WHARTON &
GARRISON LLP
Brad S. Karp
Andrew Gordon
Patrick J. Somers
1285 Avenue of the Americas
New York, New York 10019
Tel: [phone]
[e-mail]

CURTIS, MALLET-PREVOST, COLT & MOSLE, LLP
Eliot Lauer
Michael Moscato
101 Park Avenue
New York, NY 10178
T: 212.696.6000
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants Citco Fund Services
(Europe) B. V., Citco (Canada) Inc., Citco Bank
Nederland N. V. Dublin Branch, Citco Global
Custody N.V., Citco Fund Services (Bermuda)
Limited and The Citco Group Limited

4

Anwar et al. vs. Fairfield Greenwich Limited et al.
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of NY –
Case No. 09-CV-0118 (VM)
SERVICE LIST

PARTIES
Interim Co-Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs

ATTORNEYS
David Boies
Boies, Schiller & Flexner, LLP
333 Main Street
Armonk, NY 10504
T. [phone]
F. [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
David A. Barrett
Boies, Schiller & Flexner, LLP
575 Lexington Avenue
New York, NY 10022
T. [phone]
F. [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Stuart H. Singer
Sashi B. Boruchow
Boies, Schiller & Flexner, LLP
401 East Las Olas Boulevard, Suite 1200
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
T. [phone]
F. [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]
Christopher Lovell
Victor E. Stewart
Lovell Stewart Halebian Jacobson LLP
61 Broadway, Suite 501
New York, NY 10006
T. [phone]
F. [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]
Robert C. Finkel
James A. Harrod, III
E. Elizabeth Robinson
Wolf Popper LLP
845 Third Avenue
New York, NY 10022
T. [phone]

5

F. [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants
Fairfield Greenwich Ltd.
Fairfield Greenwich (Bermuda) Ltd.
Fairfield Greenwich Advisors LLC
Fairfield Risk Services Ltd.
Fairfield Heathcliff Capital LLC
Daniel Lipton
Mark McKeefry
Richard Landsberger
Charles Murphy
Andrew Smith
Lourdes Barreneche
Yanko Della Schiava
Vianney d’Hendecourt
Jacqueline Harary
Harold Greisman
Julia Luongo
Maria Teresa Pulido Mendoza
Corina Piedrahita
Santiago Reyes
Philip Toub

Mark G. Cunha
Peter E. Kazanoff
Sara A Ricciardi
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP
425 Lexington Avenue
New York, NY 10017
T. [phone]
F. [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]

Attorney for Defendants
Walter M. Noel, Jr.

Glenn Kurtz
Andrew Hammond
White & Case LLP
1155 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10036
T. [phone]
F. [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]

Attorneys for Defendant
Andres Piedrahita

Andrew J. Levander
David S. Hoffner
Dechert LLP
1095 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10036-6797
T. [phone]
T. [phone]
F. [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]

6

Attorneys for Defendant
Jeffrey Tucker

Marc E. Kasowitz
Daniel J. Fetterman
Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman LLP
1633 Broadway
New York, NY 10019
T. [phone]
F. [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]

Attorneys for Defendant
Amit Vijayvergiya

Mark P. Goodman
Helen V. Cantwell
Debevoise & Plimpton, LLP
919 Third Avenue, 31st Floor
New York, NY 10022
T. [phone]
F. [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]

Attorneys for Defendant
Cornelis Boele

Sean F. O’Shea
Michael E. Petrella
O’Shea Partners LLP
521 Fifth Avenue, 25th Floor
New York, NY 10175
T. [phone]
F. [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]

7

Andrew M. Genser
Mindy M. Yu
Kirkland & Ellis LLP
601 Lexington Avenue
New York, NY 10022
T. [phone]
F. [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]

Attorneys for Defendants
PricewaterhouseCoopers L.L.P.
(PwC Canada)

Timothy A. Duffy
Amy E. Crawford
Kirkland & Ellis LLP
300 North LaSalle
Chicago, IL 60654
T. [phone]
F. [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]

Attorneys for Defendant
PricewaterhouseCoopers Accountants
Netherlands N.V.
(PwC Netherlands)

William R. Maguire
Sarah L. Cave
Hughes Hubbard & Reed LLP
One Battery Park Plaza
New York, NY 10004
T. [phone]
F. [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]

Attorneys for Defendants
David Horn
Robert Blum

Edward M. Spiro
Robert J. Anello
Morvillo, Abramowitz, Grand, Iason, Anello &
Bohrer, P.C.
565 Fifth Avenue
New York, NY 10017
T. [phone]
F. [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]

8

Attorneys for Defendant
GlobeOp Financial Services LLC

Jonathan D. Cogan
Michael S. Kim
Kobre & Kim LLP
800 Third Avenue
New York, NY 10022
T. [phone]
F. [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]

Attorneys for Defendant
Gregory Bowes

Bruce Allen Baird
Matthew F. Dunn
Covington & Burling, LLP
1201 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20004
T. [phone]
F. [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]

9