Wounded United States veterans and family members of deceased soldiers, have filed an EFP roadside bomb injury lawsuit against five European banks.

The claimants filed the EFP roadside bomb injury lawsuit against the banks in 2014, alleging they were responsible for the deaths because they processed money that paid for the Iranian attacks.

This EFP roadside bomb injury lawsuit was led by California plaintiff Patrick F., whose son Clay allegedly died from a roadside bomb in February 2006. Patrick stated he filed the claim to give him “a sense that I was able to do something, hold someone accountable for his death.”

The EFP roadside bomb injury lawsuit claimed the banks are responsible for soldiers’ death because the Iranian money had been used to fund the shooting and roadside bombing attacks.

The EFP roadside bomb injury lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court in Brooklyn, New York and named Barclays PLC, Credit Suisse Group AG, HSBC Holdings Plc, Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc and Standard Chartered as defendants.

Overview of EFP Roadside Bomb Injury Lawsuit

This EFP roadside bomb injury lawsuit was filed under U.S. Anti-Terrorism Act, which permits victims and their loved ones to file private legal action against alleged financiers of terrorist operations. The claim alleged the defendant banks had worked with Iranian banks to insure wire transactions were made in order to get around United States sanctions.

When the money was transferred, the Iranian banks had over $100 million available to militant groups that conducted operations in Iraq towards Iran’s border. Militant groups who reportedly received the money included Shi’ite militia group Kataib Hezbollah of Iraq, along with Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

Ever since 2009, the five banks named in the EFP roadside bomb injury lawsuit have agreed to pay $3.2 billion to the United States government to resolve allegations of sanction violations in nations: Iran, Libya, and Cuba. Each of the banks reportedly signed deferred prosecution agreements with the United States Justice Department, in addition to the settlements.

However, this does not prevent the banks from facing further legal troubles from private claims. Lawyers involved in the claim state there could potential legal trouble ahead, as the Anti-Terrorism Act does not specifically cover conspiracy claims.

In addition, New York courts have previously refused similar cases unless the claims allege a direct connection between financial institutions and militant attacks. This EFP roadside bomb injury lawsuit was the first of its kind under the Anti-Terrorism Act, in which a private claim sought damages against international banks while alleging conspiracy.

The lawyers who filed this EFP roadside bomb injury lawsuit were involved in a previous similar case against Arab Bank. In this previous lawsuit, jurors had found Arab Bank liable for allegedly financing 24 attacks in Israel and Palestinian Territories between 2001 and 2004.

The lawyers alleged that each of the banks either knew or should have known what the money would be used for, and were at the minimum “deliberately indifferent.”

If you or a loved one was injured or killed by an IED or EFP while fighting in the Iraq or Afghanistan wars, legal recourse is available. Get help now by filling out the form on this page for a FREE case evaluation.

The attorneys who work with Top Class Actions will contact you if you qualify to let you know if an individual lawsuit or anti-terrorist class action lawsuit is best for you. (In general, anti-terrorist lawsuits are filed individually by each plaintiff and are not class actions.) After you fill out the form, the attorneys who work with Top Class Actions will contact you if you qualify to let you know if an individual lawsuit or class action lawsuit is best for you. Hurry — statutes of limitations may apply.

Learn More