Advertisement

June 18, 2013

UK Appeal Tribunal Confirms £8 Million Market Manipulation Fine

On January 28, the Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) upheld the decision of the Regulatory Decisions Committee (RDC) of the UK Financial Services Authority (FSA) to impose a fine of £8 million (approximately $12.6 million) on Swift Trade Inc. (Swift Trade), a Canadian company that is not FSA authorized or regulated, for market abuse in the form of “layering.” The RDC decision was reported in the September 16, 2011, edition of Corporate and Financial Weekly Digest.

The Upper Tribunal found that between January 1, 2007 and January 4, 2008, Swift Trade systematically engaged in deliberate market abuse in the form of layering of numerous individual shares on the London Stock Exchange (LSE). The manipulative trading caused a succession of small price movements in the LSE shares and Swift Trade made substantial profits. The abuse was widespread and repeated on many occasions and involved tens of thousands of trading orders by many individual traders, sometimes acting in concert with each other across many locations worldwide. The trading led to a false or misleading impression of supply and demand and artificial market prices in the LSE shares, which was to the detriment of other market participants.

The Upper Tribunal concluded that “the conduct of which Swift Trade was guilty amounted to a cynical course of intensive manipulation of the LSE … carried out over a period of a little over a year, that attempts were made to conceal it, and that, far from demonstrating remorse, those controlling Swift Trade have done everything possible to escape the consequences of their actions. Of its kind, it is as serious a case as might be imagined, and there is nothing which could possibly be said by way of mitigation.”

Read more.

©2013 Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP

About the Author

Partner

Edward Black, a partner in Katten Muchin Rosenman UK LLP, has a wide range of funds and financial services experience. He has acted for securities, commodities and derivatives brokers and dealers, banks, investment banks and investment managers for over 20 years. This has led to substantial involvement in commercial and transactional work in the financial services field as well as extensive regulatory expertise, and to significant experience with employment law matters.

+44 2 20 7776 7624

About the Author

Partner

Tim Aron, a partner in Katten Muchin Rosenman UK LLP, specialises in the regulation of financial services firms, clearing houses and trading platforms. He advises on a wide range of regulatory matters including securities and derivatives transactions, safe-keeping of money and assets, systems and controls and other high level standards, conduct of business rules, and the restructuring, acquisition and disposal of entities in the financial sector.

+44.0.20.7776.7627

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.