AMF France v. A (insider trading, 2010)

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.

Report an error in this record (amf-fr-san-2010-08-insider-trading-2010) by email

In January 2010 the AMF's Commission des sanctions fined an investment adviser 300,000 euros for buying shares in the clothing retailer Du Pareil Au Même in early 2008, for himself and for third parties, while knowing of his client's plan for a takeover bid.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

—

Disgorgement

—

Prejudgment interest

—

Total relief

—

Alleged gain

—

Penalty as published

€300k

A dash means the release did not state a figure we could extract, not that the figure is zero. Penalty and disgorgement are stored separately so aggregates across the library do not double-count the same dollars. This regulator states penalties in EUR. The figure is recorded as published and is not converted, so it does not appear in the USD totals or medians used elsewhere on this site.

What is alleged to have happened

The Commission des sanctions of the Autorité des marchés financiers (AMF, France) decided the case on 14 January 2010, after a hearing the same day. The charge was notified to M. A, who worked for a Belgian advisory company as office manager and investment adviser to a wealthy investor.

In substance the notification alleged that between 24 January and 6 March 2008 A bought shares in Du Pareil Au Même (DPAM), for his own account and for third parties, when he necessarily knew, through his duties, of his client's plan to bid for the company. The client's investment vehicle had been pitched DPAM as a bid target by an investment bank in January 2008.

The Commission held that A had been asked on 17 January 2008 to examine a possible offer for DPAM, had been told to buy and resell DPAM shares, had been kept regularly informed, and had prepared two studies on how the bid could be financed, the first sent on 1 February 2008. It held that from that date the plan was inside information for him and that he was bound to abstain. It therefore counted only his dealings from 1 February to 6 March 2008, which for his own account amounted to nearly all of his portfolio, and imposed a financial penalty of 300,000 euros.

This record does not show the profit made, whether the decision was appealed, or any action against the client or others. A was the only respondent.

This library tags the matter as insider trading. 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.

• Insider trading — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.

Timeline

1. 2010-01-14 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.

• AMF decision page
• Decision (PDF, French)

The linked release is published by the issuing regulator under its own terms. Our summary and narrative above are our own writing.

Related actions

Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.

Record added October 5, 2026. submit a correction.