- SEC secures settlement in insider dealing ring
The SEC has secured a substantial settlement from three men involved in an insider trading case brought against a corporate lawyer, a middle man and a Wall Street trader. The SEC alleged that the men were involved in insider trading in relation to at least 11 merger and acquisition announcements involving the clients of the lawyer's firm. The men agreed to repay all monies that they had gained from the insider dealing together with interest amounting, respectively, to $31.6 million, $845,000 and $516,000.
- SEC secures settlement against father and son hedge fund managers
The SEC has secured a settlement against a father and son who were hedge fund managers and their firms for misleading investors about their investment strategy and past performance. Both men told investors they had a lengthy and successful track record of success and also misled investors as to where their money would be invested. The two men raised more than $500 million for eight hedge funds and various managed accounts on the basis of these misrepresentations. The SEC has banned both men from the securities industry and has agreed a settlement of $4.8 million to settle the charges.
- Court of Appeal rules partial waiver of privilege recognised in Hong Kong
In Citic Pacific Limited v Secretary for Justice (unrep, CACV 60/2011), the Court of Appeal considered the legal principles relating to the nature and extent of legal professional privilege, and held that the concept of partial waiver of privilege is recognised under Hong Kong law. In the regulatory context, this important decision is a reminder that when handing over documents to regulators in regulatory investigations, it must be clearly stated in writing that any waiver of privilege is limited to the purposes of the investigation alone. This step may prevent any inadvertent waiver of privilege where documents in question are sought by third parties for some other purpose such as a criminal investigation. For a more detailed analysis and commentary on the case, please click here.