AMF France v. Guy Degrenne (false or misleading information, 2019)
Settled
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.
In November 2019 the AMF agreed a settlement with the tableware maker Guy Degrenne over annual results published on 22 September 2016 that allegedly omitted its cash difficulties; it agreed to pay EUR 50,000.
The record
| Agency | AMF (France) |
|---|---|
| Date filed | 2019-11-14 |
| Date resolved | 2019-11-14 |
| Court | Commission des sanctions (AMF, France) |
| Status | settled |
| Asset class | equities |
| Instruments | Shares of Guy Degrenne |
| Venue | Euronext Paris |
| Criminal parallel | No |
| Defendants | Guy Degrenne |
| Techniques | Misleading issuer disclosure |
What was ordered
- Civil penalty
- —
- Disgorgement
- —
- Prejudgment interest
- —
- Total relief
- —
- Alleged gain
- —
- Penalty as published
- €50k
What is alleged to have happened
The AMF published an administrative settlement (accord de composition administrative) with Guy Degrenne, dated 14 November 2019. This is not a contested sanctions hearing. The agreement took effect only once the AMF Collège validated it and the Commission des sanctions homologated it; the document gives the signing date but not the homologation date, so the signing date is used here.
The AMF opened an investigation in May 2016 into the Guy Degrenne share and extended it to the company’s financial reporting in December 2016. The grievance was that its annual results of 22 September 2016 may have conveyed inaccurate or misleading information.
The AMF said the report mentioned a EUR 3 million shareholder current-account advance of 29 June 2016 and a net working capital said to be sufficient for the year, without saying the advance answered cash-flow difficulties. It added that a cash forecast of 15 March 2016 had already shown a EUR 1.6 million need, only months after a EUR 10 million capital increase, and a 15 September 2016 document showed negative cash positions from August 2016 to March 2017.
The company agreed to pay EUR 50,000 to the Treasury within fifteen days of homologation. The agreement records that the Parquet national financier told the AMF on 17 June 2019 that it did not wish to bring a prosecution against the company for these facts, so no criminal case is stated.
What the record does not show: the agreement describes conduct that the person "could" or "would" have committed, so it records allegations and undertakings, not a finding of breach, and it is not styled as a fine. It does not show whether any later challenge occurred.
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
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.