The ‘I did not apply my mind’ defense to insider trading
Enforcement blogger Bruce Carton looks at a recent insider trading case, in which South Africa’s securities regulator agreed to reduce the defendant’s penalty because he claimed he “did not apply his mind to the applicable legislation at the time of the trading” but was now deeply sorry for his actions.
THIS IS MEMBERS-ONLY CONTENT
You are not logged in and do not have access to members-only content.
If you are already a registered user or a member, SIGN IN now.
Related articles
-
ArticleSCOTUS, Congress to provide new legal insider-trading definition
A case before the Supreme Court and two bills in Congress could finally establish a national legal definition for insider trading. Joe Mont reports.
-
PremiumDelayed UK antitrust case underscores compliance, reputational risks
Antitrust infringement cases in the United Kingdom can run on for years, but there’s a question whether issuing fines that are dwarfed by the revenues of those organisations involved is a worthy deterrent—particularly if they are imposed over a decade after the misconduct ended. It’s also debatable whether the first ...
-
PremiumDespite uncertainty, whistleblowers still have incentives to report misconduct
Whistleblowing in the United States is being buffered by uncertainty from regulators who are backing off policing corruption and consumer protections. Regulators like the Department of Justice and the Securities and Exchange Commission are being thrown into disarray by layoffs and restructuring. Still, whistleblowers will likely continue coming forward.