AMF France v. A, B, C and X (misleading information, 2007)
Judgment entered
Checked against the primary document on October 5, 2026. The library's summary, tags and figures for this record were compared with the regulator's own document by an AI model (Claude) following written instructions, in a single reading of the French decision; an independent second reading of 60 of the AMF records agreed on every field for 54 and on the core fields for 59. No lawyer has reviewed them. A checked record can still contain errors, and checked does not mean endorsed. See how we check records or report a correction.
On 5 April 2007 the AMF Commission des sanctions found that A, the chief executive of company Y, had presented its accounts and forecasts in a 2002 Marché Libre listing prospectus in the most favourable way through irregular entries and had attested the prospectus as accurate. It fined him EUR 10,000 and cleared the two auditors B and C and the listing adviser X.
The record
| Agency | AMF (France) |
|---|---|
| Release number | SAN-2007-22 |
| Date filed | 2007-04-05 |
| Date resolved | 2007-04-05 |
| Court | Commission des sanctions (AMF, France) |
| Status | judgment |
| Asset class | equities |
| Instruments | Shares of company Y (Marché Libre listing) |
| Venue | Euronext Paris (Marché Libre) |
| Criminal parallel | No |
| Defendants | A ; B ; C ; X |
| Techniques | Misleading issuer disclosure |
What was ordered
- Civil penalty
- —
- Disgorgement
- —
- Prejudgment interest
- —
- Total relief
- —
- Alleged gain
- —
- Penalty as published
- €10k
What is alleged to have happened
The first section of the Commission des sanctions of the AMF decided the matter on 5 April 2007. Grievances had been notified on 3 February 2005 to A and company X, and on 23 October 2006 to auditors B and C. Company Y had been admitted to the Marché Libre of Euronext in late 2002 on a prospectus dated June 2002.
A was charged with giving misleading information to the public and signing a prospectus attestation despite accounting irregularities. The auditors were charged over their limited review of interim and forecast accounts, and X over its checks of the company's legal position at the listing.
The Commission found that A, the sole negotiator of all the company's contracts, had the information to know of the commercial disputes, and that the importance and recurrence of the irregularities in invoices to be issued and work in progress showed a choice to present the company's finances as favourably as possible. It held he had misled the auditors, who relied on his notes of 15 and 26 March 2002, and had breached the rule on prospectus attestations.
It cleared B and C, who had done a limited review on the strength of A's statements and had reported the discrepancy to the prosecutor in January 2003, and X, whose alleged lapses were not shown to breach the rules. It fined A EUR 10,000, noting his difficult personal situation, and ordered publication.
The record shows only the legal characterisation, not the amounts of the inflated revenue, and the decision does not say whether it was later reformed or annulled on appeal. The AMF anonymised the respondents.
This library tags the matter as misleading issuer disclosure. The tagging is ours, not the regulator's.
For the regulator's own account of the facts, read the primary document linked above. This page deliberately summarises the structured record rather than reproducing the decision.
What technique is this, and how does it work?
This action is tagged with one technique in our taxonomy. The tagging is ours: regulators charge statutory provisions, not technique names, so the mapping is an editorial judgement described in our editorial policy.
- Misleading issuer disclosure — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
Timeline
- 2007-04-05 Commission des sanctions decision
Primary documents
Everything on this page derives from the documents below. Where our summary and the primary document disagree, the primary document is right.
Related actions
Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.