In the UBS appeal trial in Paris, the judge introduced as evidence a letter to a lottery winner in Bordeaux that had two senders. According to a UBS manager, this was a printing error.

UBS must prove in the appeal trial in Paris, in which a fine of 4.5 billion euros is at stake, that it did not break any rules in attracting French clients and, above all, that it did not incite tax fraud.

On Monday, the former UBS head for France, Jean-Frédéric de Leusse, took the witness stand. Judge Hervé Robert read to him from a letter that a UBS client adviser in Switzerland had sent to a new client in France, informing him of his account details. The Swiss adviser had previously visited the client in Bordeaux, France. The Frenchman had hit the lottery jackpot and won 26 million euros.

Problematic Document

The lawsuit revolves, among other things, around the fact that, according to a law passed in 2003, an acquisition of new French bank clients may only be carried out in France. The French judiciary is accusing UBS of having done the same from Switzerland.

Suspiciously, the letter from the UBS adviser to the lottery king had two sender addresses: once the Swiss banker's details were in the header, once those of UBS France in the footer. Judge Robert said, according to a report of news agency «Bloomberg», that he considered this one of the most problematic documents in the whole case.

Two Meetings?

Asked about the reasons for both statements on the letter document, de Leusse said it was probably a printing error. The client had asked UBS to open a Swiss account and a French account, he said. He did not believe the law required holding two separate meetings for this request.

UBS is entering the tax dispute with France for the second time, arguing that it did nothing wrong by booking French client money in Switzerland. The practice, it said, was governed by the savings tax agreement with the EU.

In the current proceedings, the evidence has not changed in principle. However, a new legal situation now applies in France: the yardstick for a fine is no longer the allegedly evaded assets, but the unpaid tax amounts. If UBS loses again, at least the fine would have to be significantly lower.