Hedge Fund Market Abuse Case Results In Fines
LONDON – The UK's Financial Services Authority (FSA) hit London-based hedge fund, GLG, and its former senior trader, Philippe Jabre, with a fine of £750,000 each in early March for market abuse.
The decision comes more than two years after the original incident, when Goldman Sachs approached Jabre during its pre-marketing phase of a convertible bond issue for Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group.
A Goldman Sachs employee, John Rustum, passed 'inside information' to Jabre, who claims he didn't realise the information was such, said a party close to the situation. Jabre then used the information to make a profit. "[It was] a complicated call, which led to a misunderstanding. Goldman Sachs has admitted this [to the FSA] in writing," said the source.
Rustum no longer works for Goldman Sachs and couldn't be contacted for comment.
A Goldman Sachs spokesman says the dealer does not comment on "regulatory matters", but an official at the US bank said its staff made it "very clear" to Jabre that he was "an insider". GLG and the FSA both refused to comment publicly on the matter.
According to the person close to the decision, although fined, Jabre was not suspended nor barred from involvement in the financial sector. This was ultimately because he was found not to have intended to break FSA rules. His offence was "a misunderstanding in hindsight". However it is "unlikely" that Jabre will stay with GLG.
The ruling represents the first successful case that the FSA has brought against a hedge fund for market abuse.
Convertible bonds represent a lucrative arbitrage opportunity for hedge funds, which can profit from going long on the bond and short on the issuer's equity.
The FSA realises this and is stepping up its monitoring of potential insider trades.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
Double, but no trouble? CVA capital hit may lack clout
Industry opinion mixed around Basel III endgame derivatives charge
Amid debanking drama, banks try to say ‘no’, safely
A basic risk management tool – the ability to turn a customer away – has become a political football
Erba myth: will US banks choose new capital measure?
B3E gives US banks a dilemma – adopt expanded risk-based approach, or a new standardised alternative
Illiquid assets pricing still needs expert judgement, say banks
EU regulators want more transparency in valuations, but some asset prices remain elusive
Fed to move tailored-capital goalposts soon, says Bowman
Banks hope agencies will index triggers for harsher capital rules to economic growth
Will SEC reporting proposal supercharge alt data providers?
Move that would allow companies to opt out of quarterly reporting disclosures welcomed
EU lawmaker calls for review of Luxembourg’s cross-border rules
Grand Duchy accused of side-stepping rules aimed at prising away banking business from London
Un-American or un-JPM? Surcharge rethink divides G-Sibs
Some see sense in rethink to funding indicator, others call for a backtrack