NY court dismisses some charges against RCBC, allows BB heist case to continue

The New York Supreme Court has set aside some charges against Manila-based Rizal Commercial Banking Corp (RCBC) but allowed the case filed by Bangladesh Bank, concerning the $81-million cyberheist in 2016, to proceed.

In a stock exchange filing on Friday, RCBC said it received a decision from the US high court on Feb 29 this year, the Philippine Daily Inquirer reports.

In the Feb 29 decision, the appellate division, first judicial department of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, ruled to dismiss three causes of action—conversion, aiding and abetting conversion, and conspiracy to commit conversion—against the bank and all defendants associated with RCBC.

It also dismissed the case against four RCBC defendants (Ismael Reyes, Brigitte Capiña, Romualdo Agarrado and Nestor Pineda) for lack of personal jurisdiction.

Aiding and abetting

RCBC said the court, however, ruled that the case can proceed against RCBC and the remaining defendants on the other causes of action, including the return of money received.

“The bank is considering whether or not to appeal this decision and order,” RCBC said.

The original complaint in the state court, filed on May 27, 2020, was for the “conversion/ theft/ misappropriation; aiding and abetting the same; conspiracy to commit the same; fraud (against RCBC); aiding and abetting and conspiracy to commit fraud; conspiracy to commit trespass against chattels; unjust enrichment; and return of money received.”

Without ruling on the merits of the case, the court confirmed its jurisdiction over RCBC and the individual defendants in a decision on Jan 14, 2023.

$81M in stolen funds

Bangladesh Bank had filed earlier cases to recover $81 million in stolen funds, which was allegedly lost to North Korean hackers.

Some of the funds were allowed to be transacted via correspondent banks in New York before being wired to fictitious accounts with RCBC.

RCBC had vowed to “defend the case vigorously” even after the New York court had dismissed its motion to dismiss.