Sure! Here’s the rewritten content while keeping the HTML tags intact:
<div><p>Access the Editor’s Digest at no cost</p><p class="article__content-sign-up-topic-description"><span>Roula Khalaf, the Editor of the FT, curates her favorite articles in this weekly newsletter.</span></p><iframe class="article__content-sign-up-iframe close" scrolling="no" id="signUpIframe" data-prev-url="/register/in-article-sign-up?ft-content-uuid=5ef72221-6d7f-4b94-9da2-55c01f74206d"></iframe></div><div id="article-body"><p>The banking sector's anticipation of being safeguarded from a multibillion-pound mis-selling scandal faced a setback on Monday when judges ruled against the UK government intervening in an upcoming court case.</p><p>The Treasury had taken the rare measure of requesting the right to intervene in the approaching Supreme Court proceedings, cautioning that a negative ruling could adversely affect the banking industry and hinder economic progress.</p><p>The decision by the five-judge panel, which included Supreme Court president Lord Reed, to deny the government's involvement poses a challenge for banks grappling with compensation liabilities amounting to tens of billions of pounds. No reasons were provided for this refusal.</p><p>Shares in Close Brothers, one of the banks most vulnerable to car loans and which projected a £165 million reserve for potential mis-selling last week, dropped 7 percent on Monday.</p><p>The Supreme Court is set to hear in April an appeal from car loan providers contesting a prior ruling from the Court of Appeal that favored consumers alleging “secret” commissions on car loans.</p><p>The ruling declaring it unlawful for banks to pay a commission to a car dealer without informed consent from the customer has reverberated throughout the banking industry.</p><p>Charlie Nunn, CEO of Lloyds, remarked in December that the UK is confronting an “investability problem” following the court ruling.</p><p>Lloyds, which owns the UK's leading car finance provider Black Horse, has allocated a £450 million provision for possible compensatory and legal expenses. Shares in the bank decreased by 2.5 percent on Monday.</p><p>HSBC analysts predict that the total compensation costs could soar to £44 billion, approaching the £50 billion disbursed by banks over mis-sold payment protection insurance.</p><p>While the government was blocked from intervening, the Supreme Court did allow the Financial Conduct Authority to participate in the case.</p><p>The banking sector and the Treasury are optimistic that the regulator will present to the court many of the arguments the government intended to voice.</p><p>The FCA expressed that it “look[ed] forward to assisting the court.”</p><p>The Treasury commented: “We respect the Court’s decision to deny our intervention application,” adding that it will “monitor [the case] closely.”</p><p>Treasury officials articulated that as the UK’s economic ministry, it is fitting for HMT to share its viewpoint on the potential ramifications of the Court of Appeal’s ruling with the Supreme Court, ensuring it is considered in their discussions.</p><p>The Supreme Court has limited time and generally favors keeping the number of interveners minimal for efficiency, typically denying permission when arguments are already represented by other parties, they noted.</p></div>