![\"Marsh](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/il\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/0321_639277082428932846.png\")
<\/p>\n\n The broker, rather than the insurers whose names were on the policies, is reported to be paying most of a deal that ended the A$2.8bn Federal Court fight\n <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Insurers may have underwritten the policies, but when the bill for one of the messiest trade credit sagas in living memory finally arrived, it was one of the world\u2019s largest brokers that reportedly dug deepest.<\/p>\n
Credit Suisse has secured about US$800m (roughly A$1.2bn) to settle its Greensill-related claim, according to the Financial Times, which cited people familiar with the matter. Global broker\u00a0Marsh<\/a>\u00a0is understood to be covering the largest portion, with\u00a0IAG<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Tokio Marine<\/a>\u00a0also contributing. None of the parties has confirmed the figure or how it was split, although Marsh\u2019s figures<\/a> show hundreds of millions booked against this very eventuality.<\/p>\n The deal ends the claim brought by two Credit Suisse supply chain finance funds in the Federal Court, which carried a face value of about A$2.8bn plus interest. On 25 September, IAG<\/a> told the ASX that its subsidiary Insurance Australia Limited (IAL) had\u00a0agreed to settle the Credit Suisse proceedings<\/a>\u00a0on confidential terms. The insurer said the settlement wouldn\u2019t have a material impact on its financial position or FY27 results, pointing to expected recoveries from insurance, reinsurance and other indemnities.<\/p>\n That confirmation came four days after IAG\u00a0told the market no settlement had been finalised<\/a>, following press reports that the dispute had been resolved on the eve of trial.<\/p>\n Read next:\u00a0IAG could be dodging $3 billion Federal Court showdown with Credit Suisse, AFR reports<\/a><\/p>\n Why was Marsh<\/a> on the hook?<\/p>\n Brokers arrange cover; they don\u2019t put up capital to pay claims. So how did Marsh end up with the biggest cheque? The answer lies in what was alleged to have said about the policies, not in the policies themselves.<\/p>\n Marsh had been Greensill\u2019s broker since 2014 and placed its trade credit cover with Bond & Credit Co (BCC). That put it in the middle of the arrangement, between the insurers and the investors buying Greensill\u2019s notes. The Credit Suisse funds were named loss payees on the policies, so the value of their investments depended on that cover holding up.<\/p>\n When the funds added Marsh Ltd to the Australian proceedings in November 2023, they alleged the broker had failed to make sure representations about the cover were complete and accurate, and had made misleading statements and omissions. Greensill Bank\u2019s administrators made similar claims, alleging Marsh hadn\u2019t arranged suitable cover and had misrepresented the insurance placed for the German lender. In a separate London case, White Oak alleged Marsh knew in May 2020 that Tokio Marine<\/a> wouldn\u2019t renew the policies but didn\u2019t pass that on.<\/p>\n The Australian forum mattered too. Marsh tried to pursue proceedings in London that could have cut across the Greensill Bank claims here, but the Federal Court\u00a0shut that down in October 2025<\/a>. Justice Thawley found the Australian cases had been validly brought and included statutory misleading conduct claims that couldn\u2019t be run in England.<\/p>\n That left Marsh facing those statutory claims in Australia, where the case was set to go to trial. Marsh hasn\u2019t admitted liability, and because every claim has now settled, none of the allegations will be tested in court.<\/p>\n The cost in Marsh\u2019s books<\/p>\n The cost now shows up clearly in Marsh\u2019s accounts. In its\u00a0latest quarterly filing with the US Securities and Exchange Commission<\/a>, the broker booked a US$144m charge for the Greensill litigation in the three months to 30 September, net of insurance recoveries. That brings its total Greensill charge for the first nine months of 2026 to US$569m, covering both the Credit Suisse deal and an earlier settlement with Greensill Bank, plus legal costs.<\/p>\n Marsh had already set aside a US$425m gross liability in the\u00a0first quarter<\/a>. It now says the settlements with White Oak, Greensill Bank and Credit Suisse end its involvement in the Australian proceedings, and it doesn\u2019t expect any further charges.<\/p>\n Read next:\u00a0Marsh reports strong Q1 2026 growth despite litigation hit<\/a><\/p>\n How a Sydney agency ended up at the centre<\/p>\n When Greensill Capital collapsed in March 2021, it took billions of dollars of investor money with it and dragged in backers including SoftBank and former UK prime minister David Cameron, who had lobbied on the firm\u2019s behalf. Its pitch was simple: buy companies\u2019 unpaid invoices, bundle them into notes and sell them to investors as low-risk products backed by insurance. Credit Suisse\u2019s funds alone held roughly US$10bn of that paper.<\/p>\n Much of the cover came through BCC, a Sydney underwriting agency that IAG half-owned until it sold its stake to Tokio Marine<\/a> in April 2019. In July 2020, Tokio Marine<\/a> moved to stop the cover after finding that a BCC underwriter, Greg Brereton, had written policies beyond his delegated authority. He was dismissed, and the withdrawal of cover helped push Greensill over the edge.<\/p>\n When the claims arrived, the insurers argued the policies should never have stood. IAL\u2019s defence, as recorded in a\u00a0June 2026 Federal Court ruling on expert evidence<\/a>, was that the policies weren\u2019t valid and BCC had no authority to issue them.<\/p>\n Read next:\u00a0Tokio Marine addresses speculation surrounding Greensill exposure<\/a><\/p>\n What is trade credit insurance?<\/p>\n Trade credit insurance pays out if a business\u2019s customers fail to pay their invoices. Greensill used it differently. Rather than protecting a single supplier, the cover sat behind the invoice-backed notes it sold to investors, and that cover was a large part of why the products were marketed as safe. When the cover went, so did the investors\u2019 safety net.<\/p>\n One claim left standing<\/p>\n The Credit Suisse deal follows IAG\u2019s\u00a0settlement in May<\/a>\u00a0of a separate claim by Greensill Bank AG and its insolvency administrator, which had a face value of about A$4bn plus interest. Marsh dates its own settlement with Greensill Bank to June.<\/p>\n That leaves US lender White Oak as the last claimant in the Federal Court proceedings, which at their peak ran to 11 interlinked cases. White Oak is pursuing IAL over a claim with a face value of about A$170m plus interest, and IAG says it continues to defend it. Marsh settled White Oak\u2019s separate London claim in May 2025 and recovered the cost through its errors and omissions insurance.<\/p>\n Read next:\u00a0Insurer IAG settles one front of the Greensill legal war, but the hardest fight lies ahead<\/a><\/p>\n Where the losses finally end up<\/p>\n![](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/il\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/0321_639277081029663932.png\")
<\/p>\n