Air Transat Reaches Tentative Agreement With Pilots, Avoids Strike and Restores Normal Operations 
Evercore Reaffirms Alphabet’s Search Dominance as AI Competition Intensifies 
ADB Approves $400 Million Loan to Boost Ease of Doing Business in the Philippines 
Malaysia Airlines Ordered to Compensate Families of MH370 Passengers 
California, 18 States Sue to Block Trump’s $100,000 H-1B Visa Fee 
Supreme Court to Review Legality of Trump’s Birthright Citizenship Restrictions 
Judge Orders Return of Seized Evidence in Comey-Related Case, DOJ May Seek New Warrant 
Trump’s Approval of AI Chip Sales to China Triggers Bipartisan National Security Concerns 
Coca-Cola’s Costa Coffee Sale Faces Uncertainty as Talks With TDR Capital Hit Snag 
SpaceX Insider Share Sale Values Company Near $800 Billion Amid IPO Speculation 
Azul Airlines Wins Court Approval for $2 Billion Debt Restructuring and New Capital Raise 
SoftBank Eyes Switch Inc as It Pushes Deeper Into AI Data Center Expansion 
EU Court Cuts Intel Antitrust Fine to €237 Million Amid Long-Running AMD Dispute 
Federal Judge Orders Restoration of SEVIS Status for Tufts PhD Student Rumeysa Ozturk 
Intel’s Testing of China-Linked Chipmaking Tools Raises U.S. National Security Concerns 
Environmental Group Sues to Block Trump Image on U.S. National Park Passes 
Westpac Director Peter Nash Avoids Major Investor Backlash Amid ASX Scrutiny 
A U.S. federal judge has dismissed two lawsuits that sought to hold Standard Chartered Bank responsible for indirectly supporting terrorist groups linked to deadly attacks in Israel and Iraq between 2010 and 2019.
U.S. District Judge Margaret Garnett, based in Manhattan, ruled that the plaintiffs—90 individuals, including victims, relatives, and representatives—failed to plausibly show that the British multinational bank “knowingly and substantially assisted” the attacks. The lawsuits, Fraenkel et al v. Standard Chartered Bank and Brauner et al v. Standard Chartered Bank, were filed under the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA).
The plaintiffs claimed that Standard Chartered provided financial and logistical services to Iran’s central bank, sanctioned financial institutions, companies, and individuals that supported militant organizations such as Hamas, Hezbollah, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and Jaysh al-Mahdi. Allegedly, this included transferring billions of dollars despite repeated warnings from U.S. counterterrorism officials.
While Judge Garnett acknowledged that Standard Chartered had “engaged in some wrongdoing” by helping clients evade U.S. sanctions, she ruled that there was no “direct nexus” between the bank’s conduct and the terrorist attacks. She emphasized that “even under the most generous reading of the allegations there are several steps between any conduct by SCB and the actions of those who directly perpetrated the attacks.”
In its defense, Standard Chartered stated in court filings that it “did not commit any acts of terrorism and did not support any terrorist or attack.” Lawyers representing the plaintiffs and Standard Chartered did not immediately respond to media requests for comment.
The dismissal represents a significant legal win for Standard Chartered, shielding it from liability under JASTA, which allows victims of terrorism to sue entities accused of providing material support. The ruling may also set a precedent in similar cases involving international banks accused of indirect ties to terrorism financing.
