Partnership Academy合作研究院.pptVIP

Securities and Investment Institute Market misconduct: recent developments case studies Dorian Drew 18 September 2007 Agenda The past The present The future Enforcement action to date The FSA’s approach will be “…to prioritise rigorously, investigating only those cases which are material and significant.” Howard Davies, March 2002 Enforcement action to date Developing body of precedent: c.20 final notices 6 Tribunal decisions 1 criminal prosecution All actions under pre-MAD types of behaviour Enforcement action to date Misuse of information cases Bracken, Middlemiss, Hutchings, Smith, Isaacs, Malins, Jabre and GLG, Davies, Parker, Mohammed Isaacs and Smith involved improper dissemination of information Baldwin: FSA failed to establish telephone conversation took place “Pre-existing trading strategy”: Parker and Jabre Enforcement action to date False or misleading impression cases Shell, Indigo Capital and Bonnier Market distortion case EBG and Potts Market misconduct under the Principles ABN AMRO Hoodless Brennan Deutsche Citigroup Jabre/GLG Pignatelli and Casoni Investments outside the scope of the market abuse regime Penalties Range from ￡1,000 to ￡17m Tribunal’s comments in Parker Davidson and Tatham Aggravating/mitigating factors Sean Pignatelli Statements of principle 2 3 - ￡20,000 penalty “Outsider trading” – passed on, and embellished, information received in an email from an analyst Did not believe information to be inside Prin 2 – failed to address his mind to warning signs and discuss with manager or compliance Prin 3 – relayed information in a way that gave impression it was inside information Credit Suisse had appropriate procedures Roberto Casoni Statement of principle 3 - ￡52,500 penalty (stage 1) Research analyst - disclosed views and proposed valuation method to certain clients prior to publication Citigroup had appropriate procedures Star analyst - market abuse? Current problem Market cleanliness FTSE 350 trading statements: “marked