Friday 1 January 2010

Europe: ECJ considers the market abuse directive

The opinion of the European Court of Justice in Spector Photo Group NV, Chris Van Raemdonck v Commissie voor het Bank, Financie- en Assurantiewezen (CBFA) (Case C-45/08) was given last week. The case, referred from the hof van beroep te Brussel (Court of Appeal of Brussels), required the ECJ to interpret, for the first time, the Market Abuse Directive (2003/6/EC). Article 2 provides:

1. Member States shall prohibit any person referred to in the second subparagraph who possesses inside information from using that information by acquiring or disposing of, or by trying to acquire or dispose of, for his own account or for the account of a third party, either directly or indirectly, financial instruments to which that information relates.

The first subparagraph shall apply to any person who possesses that information: [a] by virtue of his membership of the administrative, management or supervisory bodies of the issuer; or [b] by virtue of his holding in the capital of the issuer; or [c] by virtue of his having access to the information through the exercise of his employment, profession or duties; or [d] by virtue of his criminal activities".

The ECJ was required to consider, inter alia, whether making use of information for the purposes of Article 2 would be satisfied by the mere fact that a person in possession of inside information, acquires or disposes of, or tries to acquire or dispose of, for his own account or for the account of a third party, financial instruments to which that inside information relates. The ECJ held that this would amount to the use of inside information but recognised the right to rebut the presumption. In reaching this position, the ECJ made clear that the questions before it:

... must be determined in the light of the purpose of [the] directive, which is to protect the integrity of the financial markets and to enhance investor confidence. That confidence is based, in particular, on the assurance that they will be placed on an equal footing and protected from the misuse of inside information. Only usage which goes against that purpose constitutes prohibited insider dealing".

Further information is available in the ECJ's press release, available here (pdf). 

No comments: