APPEAL BOARD OF THE FINANCIAL SERVICES BOARD HELD AT PRETORIA CASE NO: A14/2017 In the appeal of: DECISION
|
|
- Anabel Cummings
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 APPEAL BOARD OF THE FINANCIAL SERVICES BOARD HELD AT PRETORIA CASE NO: A14/2017 In the appeal of: MICROMEGA HOLDINGS LIMITED Appellant and THE JSE LIMITED Respondent DECISION 1. The Appellant lodged an appeal against the decision of the JSE Limited ( JSE ) which imposed a penalty against it in the form of a public censure and a fine as a result of its failure to comply with the JSE Listings Requirements. 2. The Appellant does not challenge or dispute the JSE s findings in respect of its non-compliance. Essentially the appeal centres on the sanction imposed by the JSE. The penalty imposed was in the form of public censure and a fine in the amount of R of which R was suspended for a period of twelve months if not found guilty of similar transgressions. 3. In summary, the sanction was due to the Appellant repurchasing its shares during its closed period. The Appellants closed period was between 16 July 2013 to 30 September The period being during the release of
2 Page 2 its interim results for the 6 month period ending 30 June 2013 and published on 30 September During such period, it repurchased a total of shares. Sections 5.36(h) and 5.72(h) of the Listings Requirements forbids an issuer from repurchasing its securities in terms of a general or special authority during this period. 4. In addition, the specific repurchases were concluded without complying with any of the peremptory provisions of Section 5.69 of the Listings Requirements. 5. The Appellant had been afforded an opportunity to make representations and respond to the JSE s findings in respect of non-compliance aforesaid. 6. The JSE, inter alia, alleged that: 6.1 It had taken into consideration the facts and information at its disposal, including the representations made by the Appellant not to impose any penalty or sanction on the Appellant; 6.2 It initially intended imposing a public sanction and a fine in an amount of R ; 6.3 Upon the Appellant objecting to the JSE s initial decision, it reconsidered same, particularly with regard to further representations made on behalf of the company;
3 Page On reconsideration it imposed a lesser sanction, namely a public censure and a fine of R of which R was suspended and which is the subject matter on appeal before us; 6.5 Section 10(2)(e) of the Financial Markets Act ( FMA ), imposes a public duty on the JSE to enforce its Listings Requirements and to supervise and enforce compliance thereof; 6.6 The purpose of the Listing Requirements are aimed at ensuring that the business of the JSE is carried on with due regard to the public interest. 7. The General Principles", inter alia, applicable to the Listings Requirements, namely: "to ensure that holders of relevant securities are given full information and are afforded adequate opportunity to consider in advance and vote on the following: (1) substantial changes in an issuer's business operations; and (2) other matters affecting a listed company constitution or the right of holders of securities. (My emphasis) 8. Section 3.1 stipulates that every issuer whose securities are listed on the JSE shall comply with the Listings Requirements. 9. In circumstances where issuers of securities transgress the provisions of the Listings Requirements, the JSE is empowered, and indeed obliged to
4 Page 4 consider the imposition of censure and penalties as a result of these transgressions. These powers are particularly set out in section 11(1)(g) of the FMA and sections of the Listings Requirements. 10. It has been argued that Sections 5.69 and 5.72(h) of the Listings Requirements are material and peremptory. It was also submitted that compliance with the Listing Requirements promotes investor confidence towards issuers listed on the JSE, protect the rights of shareholders and members of the investing public and further militate against abuse by issuers in repurchasing its own securities. 11. The failure to comply has serious ramifications for the defaulting party. For instance, Section 5.69 of the Listings Requirements deals with specific transactions that are privately entered into by the Company with certain shareholders, hence providing additional regulatory oversight and imposes further peremptory requirements that have to be met in the event of specific repurchases of shares, namely the exclusion of certain shareholders from voting on the specific repurchases. The repurchases herein, were not armslength transactions at market related prices effected on the central order book and such transactions were not tested by the market's comprehensive and transparent price discovery mechanisms. Section 5.69 imposes onerous requirements that have to be met if an issuer intends to acquire its own shares through a specific repurchase. Compliance by issuers with these peremptory provisions and enforcement thereof by the JSE is inextricably linked to the public interest.
5 Page It was further contended by the JSE that during the closed period, the Company, its directors and other representatives are in possession of price sensitive information that has not yet been disseminated to the market or to the investing public, hence the enforcement in respect of Sections 5.69 (h) and 5.72 (h) remains an interest of a public nature. In this instance, had the Appellant repurchased its own shares after the prohibited period, it would have paid a significantly higher price for its own shares. 13. It was also submitted that the repurchases caused the Appellant to pay approximately R less for the acquisition of its own securities from its shareholders than it would have paid, had it complied with the Listings Requirements and repurchased its securities after the prohibited period. The lower purchase price paid by the Appellant was to the detriment of the shareholders from whom the shares were purchased. THE SANCTION: 14. The Appellant s contention on appeal were inter alia that: 14.1 The JSE failed to impose a suitable sanction; 14.2 There has been an unreasonable delay in the imposition of the penalty, approximately 22 months after the event;
6 Page The Sanctions Committee did not take into account the historical correspondence between the Appellant and the JSE in respect of the issues raised. Moreover, the JSE failed to have regard to the attempts of the Appellant to rectify the non-compliance after the event. It issued SENS announcement and a circular to shareholders of the Appellant and directed by the JSE. We reiterate one of the Appellant s grounds of appeal Micromega has accordingly done all that was possible to remedy the infractions and breaches and have continuously advised their shareholders of same. There was no economic compromise to the company or its shareholders. 15. On appeal the JSE s response, inter alia, was that: 15.1 It carefully considered the nature of the transgression, the volume of the shares purchased, the interest of shareholders as well as the investing public, the importance of the Listing Requirements that were breached, as well as its regulatory functions The contraventions were serious and strict compliance with the Listing Requirements is fundamental in ensuring the objective of the Financial Markets Act, more particularly the markets are to be conducted fairly, efficiently and transparently The undue delay in the imposition of the penalty should have no bearing on the appropriateness of the penalty.
7 Page Furthermore, the Appellant has failed to demonstrate that it was prejudiced in any way due to the delay. The JSE s response thereto was A penalty proportional to the transgressions is appropriate. A public censure is aimed at reprimanding the offender in public, it conveys to the investing public and shareholders of issuers listed on the exchange that the JSE enforces its listing requirements and its acts as determined against similar offences. The financial penalty is similarly appropriate as the company benefitted financially at the expense of shareholders from its repurchase of shares during a prohibition period. The financial penalty of R is a small amount if regard is had to the penal jurisdiction if the JSE and the financial loss suffered by shareholders. 1 (My emphasis) 15.5 Furthermore, the JSE motivated that the sanctions imposed must vindicate the importance the prohibited requirements listed above. They are of utmost importance to ensure the integrity of the JSE s market and the transparency and fairness of transactions in listed securities concluded on the JSE and they are essential to protect the rights of shareholders and the investing public. 16. We find a previous decision by this Appeal Board to be relevant. In Michael Berman v The Financial Services Board, Judge Friedman (the chairperson of the panel at the time) specifically acknowledged that if one has regard to the objects of the Act, deterrence is undoubtedly of paramount 1 Page 19 and 20 of the record.
8 Page 8 importance when a penalty is imposed for a contravention of the kind committed by the Appellant. 17. Section 2 defines the object of the Financial Markets Act 19 of 2012 namely: (a) Ensure that the South African financial markets are fair, efficient and transparent (b) Increase confidence in the South African Financial Markets by: (i) requiring that securities services be provided in a fair, efficient and transparent manner, and (ii) contributing to the maintenance of a stable market environment; (c) (d) (e) promote the protection of regenerated process and clients; reduce systemic risk; and promote the international competitiveness of securities services in South Africa. 18. It was further remarked that the penalty imposed must be fair. It has been suggested that a fair and effective regulatory penalty regime should combine the essential features. Penalties should be set at a level which are sufficiently high to deter future contraventions of the law, provided that any given penalty is not disproportionate to the seriousness of the offence. 19. To determine whether we are entitled to interfere on the basis involves measuring the deterrence against other relevant factors which includes that the penalty must be proportionate when weighed against the seriousness of the offence.
9 Page In Federal Mogul Aftermarkets Southern Africa (Pty) Ltd v Competition Commission and another 2005 (6) BCLR 613 CAC at 636C, it was stated: This court does not enjoy an unfettered discretion to interfere with the Tribunal s assessment and inspection of an administrative penalty. Even if we decided that a different penalty was appropriate we are not merely at large to substitute our finding for that of the Tribunal. This approach is consistent with the general principle the court of appeal has limited power to interfere. It can only do so on certain well-recognized grounds namely, where the court a quo exercised its discretion capriciously or upon a wrong principle or where it has not brought its unbiased judgment to bear on the question where it has not acted for substantial reasons. 21. Having considered the conspectuous of the facts before us, as well as the legislative prescripts relevant, we find that the JSE had not exercised its mind capriciously or upon a wrong principle. Nor do we find that the penalty was excessive or startlingly inappropriate. 22. Cognisance must also be taken of the fact that the sanction had been reconsidered after the JSE had considered the Appellant s submissions. 23. The mitigating factors presented on behalf of the Appellant namely that it had taken 22 months for the JSE to impose the sanction and that valid and acceptable explanations were proffered in respect of their non-compliance has also been noted. As alluded to above, the penalty must be proportionate to the offences committed. It must be weighed against the
10 Page 10 nature of the transgressions. There is no doubt that the non-compliance was of a serious and material nature. 24. We also note that the JSE as it had reconsidered the sanctions after receipt of the Appellant s representations and had further reduced the sanction period. We may have imposed a different penalty. However, we can only do so if the JSE exercised its discretion arbitrantly capriciously or upon wrong principle. It is on this basis that the appeal must fail. COSTS: 25. The parties agreed that the issue of costs is dependent on the result and we find the principle that costs should follow the result to be applicable in this instance. 26. The following order is made: (1) The appeal is dismissed with costs. SIGNED at PRETORIA on this 26 th day of OCTOBER 2017 on behalf of the Panel. H KOOVERJIE ADV H KOOVERJIE SC with: Mr J Pema Adv W Ndinisa
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA
/ v IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA APPEAL CASE NO.: A354/2017 (Enforcement Committee of FSB) CASE NO.: 17/2016 (1) REPORTABLE: YES / NO (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: YES/NO
More informationAppeal Panel Hearing. Case of. Mr Alexander Banyard. Thursday 15 June RICS Parliament Square, London. Panel
Appeal Panel Hearing Case of Mr Alexander Banyard On Thursday 15 June 2017 At RICS Parliament Square, London Panel Julian Weinberg (Lay Chair) Ian Hastie (Surveyor Member) Helen Riley (Surveyor Member)
More informationPolicy Statement Financial penalties imposed by the Bank under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 or under Part 5 of the Banking Act 2009
Policy Statement Financial penalties imposed by the Bank under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 or under Part 5 of the Banking Act 2009 April 2013 1 Introduction 1. This statement of policy
More informationMoney-Market Reference Interest Rates. Jibar: Code of Conduct, Governance Process and Operating Rules
Money-Market Reference Interest Rates Jibar: Code of Conduct, Governance Process and Operating Rules August 2015 1 Abbreviations CEO FMD FMLG FSB FSC Jibar JSE NCD SARB RROC RRWG Chief Executive Officer
More informationEnvironmental Appeal Board
Environmental Appeal Board APPEAL NO. 92/23 WILDLIFE In the matter of appeal under s103 Wildlife Act, SBC Chap. 57 Index Chap. 433.1, 1982 BETWEEN Byron Dalziel APPELLANT AND Deputy Director of Wildlife
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA Case number : 141/05 Reportable In the matter between : L N SACKSTEIN NO in his capacity as liquidator of TSUMEB CORPORATION LIMITED (in liquidation) APPELLANT
More informationIN THE LABOUR APPEAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA HELD IN JOHANNESBURG. Case No: JA36/2004
1 IN THE LABOUR APPEAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA HELD IN JOHANNESBURG Case No: JA36/2004 In the matter between SERGIO CARLOS APPELLANT and IBM SOUTH AFRICA (PTY) LTD ELIAS M HLONGWANE N.O 1 ST RESPONDENT 2
More informationThe Central Bank of The Bahamas
The Central Bank of The Bahamas CONSULTATION PAPER on the Draft Banks and Trust Companies Regulation (Amendment) (No. 1) Bill, 2013 and the Draft Banks and Trust Companies (Administrative Monetary Penalties),
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA REPORTABLE Case number: 176/2000 In the matter between: SOUTH AFRICAN RAISINS (PROPRIETARY) LIMITED JOHANNES PETRUS SLABBER 1 st Appellant 2 nd Appellant
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE HIGH COURT) Case No: A338/12. JUDGMENT delivered on 21 May 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE HIGH COURT) Case No: A338/12 In the matter between: THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS CAPE OF GOOD HOPE Appellant and DENVOR PAUL FIELIES Respondent JUDGMENT
More informationIn the Matter of Part 4 of the Real Estate Agents Act License No:
In the Matter of Part 4 of the Real Estate Agents Act 2008 And In the Matter of In the Matter of Complaint No CA3285615 Ocena (Maree) Clarke License No: 10017302 Decision of Complaints Assessment Committee
More informationINTHE LABOUR APPEAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG G4S CASH SOLUTIONS SA (PTY) LTD THE ROAD FREIGHT AND LOGISTICS INDUSTRY
INTHE LABOUR APPEAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG Reportable Case no: JA51/15 In the matter between:- G4S CASH SOLUTIONS SA (PTY) LTD Appellant And MOTOR TRANSPORT WORKERS UNION OF SOUTH AFRICA (MTWU)
More informationThe Panel found Dr Brew s fitness to practise was impaired and determined to erase his name from the Register.
Appeals Circular A 04 /15 08 May 2015 To: Fitness to Practise Panel Panellists Legal Assessors Copy: Interim Orders Panel Panellists Panel Secretaries Medical Defence Organisations Employer Liaison Advisers
More informationA2X TRADING RULES. A2X Rules. Page 1
A2X TRADING RULES Page 1 SECTION CONTENT OF THE RULES PAGE NUMBER Index Index 2 Introduction Introduction 3 Section 1 Definitions and interpretation 4 Section 2 Applications for and termination of Membership
More informationOPERATING GUIDELINES BETWEEN THE FINANCIAL CONDUCT AUTHORITY AND THE PANEL ON TAKEOVERS AND MERGERS ON MARKET MISCONDUCT
Agreed version: 8 July 2016 OPERATING GUIDELINES BETWEEN THE FINANCIAL CONDUCT AUTHORITY AND THE PANEL ON TAKEOVERS AND MERGERS ON MARKET MISCONDUCT A. Purpose, status and application of the guidelines
More informationGUIDELINES FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF MONETARY PENALTIES
SUPERVISORY AND REGULATORY GUIDELINES Administrative Monetary Penalties Guidelines Issued: 19 th May, 2016 Last Amended 20 th June, 2016 GUIDELINES FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF MONETARY PENALTIES 1. INTRODUCTION
More informationRe Klemke. The Dealer Member Rules of the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada (IIROC)
Re Klemke IN THE MATTER OF: The Dealer Member Rules of the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada (IIROC) and The By-Laws of the Investment Dealers Association of Canada (IDA) and Paul Ryan
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT NOT REPORTABLE Case No: 100/13 In the matter between: GEOFFREY MARK STEYN Appellant and THE STATE Respondent Neutral citation: Geoffrey Mark Steyn v
More informationNEW ZEALAND LAWYERS AND CONVEYANCERS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL [2017] NZLCDT 5 LCDT 015/16. of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006
NEW ZEALAND LAWYERS AND CONVEYANCERS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL [2017] NZLCDT 5 LCDT 015/16 IN THE MATTER of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 BETWEEN STANDARDS COMMITTEE 3 OF THE CANTERBURY/WESTLAND BRANCH
More informationJUDGMENT EKSTEEN, JA: and THE LAW SOCIETY OF THE CAPE EKSTEEN, OLIVIER, ZULMAN, PLEWMAN, JJAet MELUNSKY, AJA. DATE OF HEARING: 15 May 1998
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA Case No 468/96 (CPD) In the matter between: RAMESH VASSEN Appellant and THE LAW SOCIETY OF THE CAPE OF GOOD HOPE Respondent CORAM: EKSTEEN,
More informationIN THE NATIONAL CONSUMER TRIBUNAL HELD IN CENTURION
IN THE NATIONAL CONSUMER TRIBUNAL HELD IN CENTURION Case Number: NCT/31877/2015/56(1) In the matter between: SA TAXI SECURITISATION (PTY) LTD APPLICANT and NATIONAL CREDIT REGULATOR RESPONDENT Coram: Adv.
More informationADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL. Judgement No Case No Against: The Secretary-General of the United Nations
United Nations AT/DEC/1364 Administrative Tribunal Distr. Limited 6 February 2008 Original: English ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL Judgement No. 1364 Case No. 1442 Against: The Secretary-General of the United
More informationGUERNSEY FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMISSION IMPOSITION OF LICENCE CONDITIONS
GUERNSEY FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMISSION IMPOSITION OF LICENCE CONDITIONS August 2016 Guernsey Financial Services Commission PO Box 128, Glategny Court, Glategny Esplanade, St Peter Port, Guernsey, GY1 3HQ
More informationJUDGMENT. [1] In the Court a quo the appellant was refused bail by the Port Elizabeth
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE LOCAL DIVISION, PORT ELIZABETH Case no: CA&R15/2016 Date heard: 25 th January 2017 Date delivered: 2 nd February 2017 In the matter between: LUTHANDO MFINI
More informationFREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA
FREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA In the appeal of: DAVID LEPHUTHING Appeal No.:A137/2012 Appellant and THE STATE Respondent CORAM: MOLEMELA, J et THAMAGE, AJ DELIVERED ON: 14
More informationSHANE ROSS REASONS FOR DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL
BEFORE THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL [2012] NZREADT 4 READT 113/11 IN THE MATTER OF BETWEEN a charge laid under s.91 of the Real Estate Agents Act 2008 THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS AUTHORITY Appellant
More informationArbitration CAS 2007/A/1367 FC Metallurg v. Leo Lerinc, order of 5 March Panel: Mr. Otto de Witt Wijnen (the Netherlands), Sole Arbitrator
Tribunal Arbitral du Sport Court of Arbitration for Sport Arbitration FC Metallurg v. Leo Lerinc, Panel: Mr. Otto de Witt Wijnen (the Netherlands), Sole Arbitrator Football Request for a stay of a FIFA
More information- and - THE COMMISSIONERS FOR HER MAJESTY S. TRIBUNAL: JUDGE ROGER BERNER MR HARVEY ADAMS FCA (Member)
[11] UKFTT 588 (TC) TC01431 Appeal number: TC/11/2813 Income tax penalty for careless inaccuracy FA 07, Sch 24 first occasion on which inaccurate return made - special circumstances suspension of penalty
More informationRACING APPEALS TRIBUNAL IN THE MATTER OF A STAY APPLICATION BY DEAN MCDOWELL
RACING APPEALS TRIBUNAL IN THE MATTER OF A STAY APPLICATION BY DEAN MCDOWELL 1. Mr McDowell a licensed trainer, has lodged an appeal against the decision of 12 March 2015 of the Stewards appointed under
More informationThe JSE Limited Listings Requirements
The JSE Limited Listings Requirements BULLETIN 3 of 2008 as updated on 14 August 2008 30 JULY 2008 Dear Subscriber Please note that Bulletin 3 of 2008 has been updated due to an erratum in paragraphs 3.18(f),
More informationFinancial Services Authority FINAL NOTICE. Mr Richard Anthony Holmes. 14 Falmouth Avenue Highams Park London E4 9QR. Individual. Dated: 1 July 2009
Financial Services Authority FINAL NOTICE To: Of: Individual Reference Number: Mr Richard Anthony Holmes 14 Falmouth Avenue Highams Park London E4 9QR RAH01211 Dated: 1 July 2009 TAKE NOTICE: The Financial
More information[1] This appeal, which is against both the conviction and the sentence, is with leave of
P a g e 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH GAUTENG, PRETORIA) CASE NO: A259/10 (1) REPORTABLE: YES / NO (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: YES/NO (3) REVISED. 18/04/2013.. DATE... SIGNATURE In the
More informationJaff (s.120 notice; statement of additional grounds ) [2012] UKUT 00396(IAC) THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE GRUBB.
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Jaff (s.120 notice; statement of additional grounds ) [2012] UKUT 00396(IAC) THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House On 21 August 2012 Determination Promulgated
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA FREE STATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN BENJAMIN MOSOLOMI NSIKI
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA FREE STATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN In the appeal of: Appeal No.:A165/2014 BENJAMIN MOSOLOMI NSIKI Appellant and THE STATE Respondent CORAM: MOLEMELA, JP et MURRAY, AJ HEARD
More informationJUDGMENT ON AN AGREED OUTCOME
SOLICITORS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL IN THE MATTER OF THE SOLICITORS ACT 1974 Case No. 11755-2017 BETWEEN: SOLICITORS REGULATION AUTHORITY Applicant and ANDREW JOHN PUDDICOMBE Respondent Before: Mr D. Green
More informationCouncil. International Seabed Authority ISBA/16/C/6
International Seabed Authority Council Distr.: General 5 March 2010 Original: English Sixteenth session Kingston, Jamaica 26 April-7 May 2010 Proposal to seek an advisory opinion from the Seabed Disputes
More informationCOMMISSION IMPLEMENTING DECISION. of XXX
EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, XXX [ ](2017) XXX draft COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING DECISION of XXX on the equivalence of the legal and supervisory framework applicable to recognised exchange companies in Hong
More informationAPPENDIX B to Consultation Paper No Decision-Making Process
APPENDIX B to Consultation Paper No.1 2019 Decision-Making Process Issued: [xxxxx]1 March 2018 Glossary of Terms Glossary of Terms For the purposes of this document, the following terms should be understood
More informationGuidance Note. Insider Dealing Part II. A practical guide to good governance. The Hong Kong Institute of Chartered Secretaries
Guidance Note A practical guide to good governance The Hong Kong Institute of Chartered Secretaries Chartered Secretaries. More than meets the eye. Insider Dealing Part II June 2008 Reference number: 7
More informationCONSULTATION PAPER: REGULATION OF EXCHANGES UNDER THE FINANCIAL MARKETS ACT 19 OF The FSB invites comments on all matters in this paper.
CONSULTATION PAPER: REGULATION OF EXCHANGES UNDER THE FINANCIAL MARKETS ACT 19 OF 2012 1. Responding to this paper The FSB invites comments on all matters in this paper. Comments would be most helpful
More information1. Miss Conroy was a registered Associate Member of the Chartered Institute of Management Accountants (CIMA). Your CIMA Contact ID is 1-GN41.
Miss Clare Conroy of Andover, United Kingdom CIMA Disciplinary Committee Meeting held on 21 November 2017 References in this decision to Regulations are to those in the Institute s Royal Charter, Byelaws
More informationAppellant. NEW ZEALAND POLICE Respondent. Miller, Cooper and Winkelmann JJ. A Shaw for Appellant A M Powell and E J Devine for Respondent
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA600/2015 [2016] NZCA 420 BETWEEN AND DINH TU DO Appellant NEW ZEALAND POLICE Respondent Hearing: 24 August 2016 Court: Counsel: Judgment: Miller, Cooper and Winkelmann
More informationWeiqing Jane Jin. Securities Act, RSBC 1996, c Hearing. Panel Judith Downes Commissioner George C. Glover, Jr. Commissioner
Citation: 2014 BCSECCOM 424 Weiqing Jane Jin Securities Act, RSBC 1996, c. 418 Hearing Panel Judith Downes Commissioner George C. Glover, Jr. Commissioner Hearing Date October 1, 2014 Submissions completed
More informationCase No.: IT In the matter between: Appellant. and. Respondent. ") for just over sixteen years, IN THE TAX COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
IN THE TAX COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA AT PORT ELIZABEH Case No.: IT13726 In the matter between: Appellant and THE COMMISSIONER FOR THE SOUTH AFRICAN REVENUE SERVICE Respondent JUDGMENT REVELAS J: [1] The appellant
More informationIN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, HELD AT JOHANNESBURG
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, HELD AT JOHANNESBURG Not Reportable Case No: JR 1147/14 In the matter between: THABISO MASHIGO Applicant and MEIBC First Respondent MOHAMMED RAFEE Second Respondent
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV [2014] NZHC ASTRID RUTH CLARK Appellant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV-2013-404-004873 [2014] NZHC 1611 BETWEEN AND ASTRID RUTH CLARK Appellant REAL ESTATE AGENTS AUTHORITY (CAC 2004) Respondent Hearing: 13 June 2014
More informationIN THE TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL TAX APPEAL NUMBER 15 OF 2015 KENINDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED VERSUS THE COMMISSIONER OF DOMESTIC TAXES RESPONDENT
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL TAX APPEAL NUMBER 15 OF 2015 KENINDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED APPELLANT VERSUS THE COMMISSIONER OF DOMESTIC TAXES RESPONDENT BACKGROUND:- JUDGMENT 1. The
More informationAUCKLAND STANDARDS COMMITTEE No. 2 Applicant. PATRICK JAMES KENNELLY Respondent
NEW ZEALAND LAWYERS AND CONVEYANCERS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL [2017] NZLCDT 37 LCDT 005/17 IN THE MATTER of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 BETWEEN AUCKLAND STANDARDS COMMITTEE No. 2 Applicant AND PATRICK
More informationTHE HUMAN RIGHTS REVIEW TRIBUNAL & ORS Respondents
NOTE: ORDER OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS REVIEW TRIBUNAL AND OF THE HIGH COURT PROHIBITING PUBLICATION OF NAMES, ADDRESSES OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF THE SECOND, THIRD AND FOURTH RESPONDENTS AND THE SECOND RESPONDENT'S
More informationAFRICAN RAINBOW MINERALS LIMITED POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
Updated by Bowman Gilfillan and adopted by the Board of Directors (the Board ) on 20 May 2011, updated by the Board on 28 August 2013 and further updated by the Board on 29 May 1. INTRODUCTION The JSE
More informationHEARING PARTLY HEARD IN PRIVATE
HEARING PARTLY HEARD The Committee has made a determination in this case that includes some private information. That information has been omitted from this text. GARNETT, Dean Andrew Registration No:
More informationRACING APPEALS TRIBUNAL IN THE MATTER OF A STAY APPLICATION BY NEIL DAY
RACING APPEALS TRIBUNAL IN THE MATTER OF A STAY APPLICATION BY NEIL DAY 1. Mr Day a licensed trainer, has lodged an appeal against the decision of 13 March 2015 of the Stewards appointed under The Australian
More informationFinancial Services Authority FINAL NOTICE. 1 Fore Street Budleigh Salterton Devon EX9 6NG. Individual ref : MXL00073 Firm Ref:
Financial Services Authority FINAL NOTICE To: Mark Joseph Laurenti 1 Fore Street Budleigh Salterton Devon EX9 6NG To: Independent Mortgage Advisory Service Limited Individual ref : MXL00073 Firm Ref: 479446
More informationGUIDANCE NOTE. Public Interest Disclosure (Whistleblowing)
Legal Protection for Whistleblowers GUIDANCE NOTE Public Interest Disclosure (Whistleblowing) There is no general legal duty on workers to disclose or report wrongdoing on the part of their employer. However,
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT DAVID WALLACE ZIETSMAN MULTICHOICE AFRICA (PTY) SECOND RESPONDENT
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Case No: 771/2010 In the matter between: DAVID WALLACE ZIETSMAN APPELLANT and ELECTRONIC MEDIA NETWORK LIMITED MULTICHOICE AFRICA (PTY) LIMITED FIRST
More informationAPPEALS & REVISIONS. PART I (For CAF-6 and ICMAP students)
Chapter 18 APPEALS & REVISIONS Section Rule Topic covered (Part - I for CAF-6 & ICMAP students) PART I 127 76 Appeal to the Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals) 128 Procedure in appeal 129 Decision in
More informationFinancial Services Authority
Financial Services Authority FINAL NOTICE To: Of: Sett Valley Insurance Services 18 Market Street New Mills High Peak Derbyshire SK22 4AE Date: 27 January 2010 TAKE NOTICE: The Financial Services Authority
More informationof the United Nations
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL Judgement No. 641 Case No. 714: FARID Against: The Secretary-General of the United Nations THE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL OF THE UNITED NATIONS, Composed of Mr. Samar Sen, President;
More informationFINAL NOTICE. Unit 8a, Maple Estate, Stocks Lane, Barnsley, South Yorkshire S75 2BL
Financial Services Authority FINAL NOTICE To: Address: Cricket Hill Financial Planning Limited Unit 8a, Maple Estate, Stocks Lane, Barnsley, South Yorkshire S75 2BL Date: 16 February 2011 TAKE NOTICE:
More informationTHE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, CAPE TOWN JUDGMENT
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA Not reportable Of interest to other judges THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, CAPE TOWN JUDGMENT Case no: C 1147/10 In the matter between: SA POST OFFICE LTD and CCMA JW MCGAHEY
More informationIN THE LABOUR APPEAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG BRIDGESTONE SA (PTY) LTD
IN THE LABOUR APPEAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG Reportable/Not reportable Case no: JA28/15 In the matter between: BRIDGESTONE SA (PTY) LTD Appellant and NATIONAL UNION OF METALWORKERS UNION OF
More informationFINAL AGENCY DECISION
U.S. Department of Agriculture Food and Nutrition Service Administrative Review Branch Alexandria, VA 22302 CJ s Meat Market Appellant, v. Case Number: C0184893 Retailer Operations Division, Respondent
More informationGEORGE MUNICIPALITY POLICY ON UNAUTHORISED, IRREGULAR OR FRUITLESS AND WASTEFUL EXPENDITURE. Approved by Council on 27 May 2015
GEORGE MUNICIPALITY - POLICY ON UNAUTHORISED, IRREGULAR OR FRUITLESS AND WASTEFUL EXPENDITURE Approved by Council on 27 May 2015 CONTENTS 1. BACKGROUND 3 2. OBJECTIVE 3 3. DEFINITIONS 4 4. REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
More informationEnforcement Guide. Chapter 15. Disqualification of auditors and actuaries
Enforcement Guide Chapter Disqualification of auditors and actuaries Section.1 : Introduction.1 Introduction.1.1 Auditors and actuaries fulfil a vital role in the management and conduct of firms, AUTs
More informationFINAL NOTICE The FSA gave you a Decision Notice on 28 July 2010 which notified you that the FSA had decided to:
Financial Services Authority FINAL NOTICE To: Address: Individual reference number: Michael Kwesi Yamoah The Lodge Worting House Church Lane Basingstoke Hampshire RG23 8PX MXY01110 Dated: 28 July 2010
More information4AX LISTING REQUIREMENTS
4AX LISTING REQUIREMENTS 4 AFRICA EXCHANGE PROPRIETARY LIMITED 2013/031754/07 ISSUE 2016/01 4 AFRICA EXCHANGE PROPRIETARY LIMITED HAS MADE AN APPLICATION TO THE FINANCIAL SERVICES BOARD ON 10 JUNE 2015
More information10-11/0679 File No: P/017/PR007/001 FINANCIAL MARKETS (REGULATORS AND KIWISAVER) BILL - INITIAL BRIEFING
10-11/0679 File No: P/017/PR007/001 The Chair COMMERCE SELECT COMMITTEE FINANCIAL MARKETS (REGULATORS AND KIWISAVER) BILL - INITIAL BRIEFING INTRODUCTION 1 The Financial Markets (Regulators and KiwiSaver)
More informationMEASUREMENT OF SSSC ANTI CORRUPTION
MEASUREMENT OF SSSC ANTI CORRUPTION SSSC COALITION AGAINST CORRUPTION Update in 2018 By the Board of Director resolution no.1/2018 dated 27 Feb.2018 PREFACE The Company is committed to conduct its business
More informationFINAL NOTICE. i. imposes on Peter Thomas Carron ( Mr Carron ) a financial penalty of 300,000; and
FINAL NOTICE To: Peter Thomas Carron Date of 15 September 1968 Birth: IRN: PTC00001 (inactive) Date: 16 September 2014 ACTION 1. For the reasons given in this Notice, the Authority hereby: i. imposes on
More informationHIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA)
- - ------------------- HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA) CASE NO: A200/2016 DELETE WHICHEVER IS NOT APPLICABLE (1) REPORTABLE: ~ / NO. (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES:,$ I NO. (3)
More informationFINAL NOTICE. 1. For the reasons given in this Notice, the Authority hereby takes the following action against Andrew Barlas:
FINAL NOTICE To: Address: IRN: Andrew Barlas 17 Kellie Grove Stewartfield East Kilbride Glasgow Lanarkshire G74 4DN AXB00098 Dated: 24 September 2014 ACTION 1. For the reasons given in this Notice, the
More informationFINANCIAL INTELLIGENCE CENTRE ACT (FICA)
1st Floor, 2 Albury Park, Albury Road, Dunkeld West, 2196. Docex 11 Hyde Park. t +27 11 560 7100 f +27 11 759 7960. Stellenbosch Office: t +27 82 287 3173 1. INTRODUCTION FINANCIAL INTELLIGENCE CENTRE
More informationReasons for Decision. Harness Racing New South Wales ( HRNSW ) Steward s Inquiry Mr Greg Bennett
Reasons for Decision Harness Racing New South Wales ( HRNSW ) Steward s Inquiry Mr Greg Bennett Stewards Panel: R Sanders (Chairman), M Prentice & C Paul The Charges: 1. On 7 February 2014, Mr Bennett
More informationThe names and identifying details of the parties in this decision have been changed.
LCRO 261/2014 CONCERNING an application for review pursuant to section 193 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 AND CONCERNING a determination of the Standards Committee BETWEEN OL Applicant AND MR
More informationIN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA HELD AT BRAAMFONTEIN MEC FOR EDUCATION, GAUTENG
Reportable Delivered 28092010 IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA HELD AT BRAAMFONTEIN CASE NO JR 1846/09 In the matter between: MEC FOR EDUCATION, GAUTENG APPLICANT and DR N M M MGIJIMA 1 ST RESPONDENT
More informationU.S. Department of Agriculture Food and Nutrition Service Administrative Review Branch Alexandria, VA FINAL AGENCY DECISION
U.S. Department of Agriculture Food and Nutrition Service Administrative Review Branch Alexandria, VA 22302 Rose Hill Food Basket, Appellant, v. Case Number: C0189467 Retailer Operations Division, Respondent.
More informationU.S. Department of Agriculture Food and Nutrition Service Administrative Review Branch Alexandria, VA FINAL AGENCY DECISION ISSUE AUTHORITY
U.S. Department of Agriculture Food and Nutrition Service Administrative Review Branch Alexandria, VA 22302 Gage Park Food, Appellant, v. Case Number: C0195219 Retailer Operations Division, Respondent.
More informationIN THE LABOUR APPEAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG BILLION GROUP (PTY) LTD
IN THE LABOUR APPEAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG Reportable Case no: JA 64/2016 In the matter between: BILLION GROUP (PTY) LTD Appellant and MOTHUSI MOSHESHE First Respondent COMMISSION FOR CONCILIATION
More informationFINAL NOTICE. To: City & Provincial To: Mr Zaffar Hassan Tanweer
FINAL NOTICE To: City & Provincial To: Mr Zaffar Hassan Tanweer FRN: 302147 IRN: ZHT01000 Address: 21 Halifax Road Denholme Bradford UNITED KINGDOM BD13 4EN Dated: 13 March 2014 1. ACTION 1.1. For the
More information- and - THE COMMISSIONERS FOR HER MAJESTY S REVENUE & CUSTOMS. TRIBUNAL: Judge Peter Kempster Mrs Shameem Akhtar
[] UKFTT 02 (TC) TC04432 Appeal number: TC/13/87 INCOME TAX penalties mitigated CIS penalties whether disproportionate RCC v Bosher whether delay in arranging oral hearing of appeal was breach of article
More informationFIFA S NEW APPROACH TO THE ENFORCEMENT OF MONETARY DECISIONS
FIFA S NEW APPROACH TO THE ENFORCEMENT OF MONETARY DECISIONS Introduction In recent years, the FIFA Disciplinary Committee has noted that a very high number of football stakeholders, mainly clubs, continue
More informationTribunal Arbitral du Sport
Tribunal Arbitral du Sport Court of Arbitration for Sport Arbitration CAS 2004/A/780 Christian Maicon Henning v. Prudentopolis Esporte Clube & Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA),
More informationIN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (HELD AT JOHANNESBURG) SEJAKE CASSIUS SEBATANA
1 IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (HELD AT JOHANNESBURG) Reportable Case no. J 2069/11 In the matter between: SEJAKE CASSIUS SEBATANA Applicant And RATTON LOCAL MUNICIPALITY GLEN LEKOMANYANE N.O. First
More informationFINANCIAL ADVISORY AND INTERMEDIARY SERVICES
FINANCIAL ADVISORY AND INTERMEDIARY SERVICES About The Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services (FAIS) Division was responsible for the administration of the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services
More informationFINAL NOTICE. Matthew Sebastian Piper 11.5 Fournier Street, London, E1 6QE
Financial Services Authority FINAL NOTICE To: Of: Individual Reference Number: Matthew Sebastian Piper 11.5 Fournier Street, London, E1 6QE MSP01040 Date: 13 May 2009 TAKE NOTICE: The Financial Services
More information1. Mr Hughes had not responded at all to the Notice of Hearing. The Panel therefore proceeded on the basis that the above charge was not admitted.
Disciplinary Panel Meeting Case of Mr David Hughes [0384088] Ringwood, UK On Wednesday 18 July 2018 At RICS 55 Colmore Row, Birmingham, B3 2AS Panel John Anderson (Lay Chair) Dr Angela Brown (Lay Member)
More informationTHE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG JUDGMENT. Review application- inconsistent application discipline
THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG JUDGMENT Reportable Of interest to other judges Case no: JR 314/2011 In the matter between: MONTE CASINO Applicant and COMMISSION
More informationCENTRAL BANK OF KENYA ACT
LAWS OF KENYA CENTRAL BANK OF KENYA ACT CHAPTER 491 Revised Edition 2014 [2012] Published by the National Council for Law Reporting with the Authority of the Attorney-General www.kenyalaw.org [Rev. 2014]
More informationFINAL NOTICE. By failing to announce that change without delay, Eurodis contravened the continuing obligations under Listing Rule 9.2(a).
Financial Services Authority FINAL NOTICE To: C/o Eurodis Electron plc Neville Kahn and Nicholas Edwards Joint Administrators Deloitte & Touche LLP 1 Stone Cutter Street London EC4A 3TR Date: 9 December
More information22 May The Manager Consumer Credit Unit Corporations and Financial Services Division The Treasury PARKES ACT 2600
22 May 2009 The Manager Consumer Credit Unit Corporations and Financial Services Division The Treasury PARKES ACT 2600 Exposure Draft: National Consumer Credit Regime I would like to make the following
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Reportable Case No: 728/2015 In the matter between: TRANSNET SOC LIMITED APPELLANT and TOTAL SOUTH AFRICA (PTY) LTD FIRST RESPONDENT SASOL OIL (PTY)
More informationREPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE SOUTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT (JOHANNESBURG)
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE SOUTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT (JOHANNESBURG) CASE NO: A 100/2008 DATE:26/08/2011 REPORTABLE In the matter between LEPHOI MOREMOHOLO APPELLANT and THE STATE RESPONDENT Criminal
More informationShort notes on: DOUBLE JEOPARDY - WHEN WILL COURTS DISREGARD THIS RULE. Introduction
Short notes on: DOUBLE JEOPARDY - WHEN WILL COURTS DISREGARD THIS RULE Introduction It is trite that in criminal proceedings a person cannot be tried for the same crime twice, once that person has been
More informationShort notes on: DOUBLE JEOPARDY - WHEN WILL COURTS DISREGARD THIS RULE. Introduction
Short notes on: DOUBLE JEOPARDY - WHEN WILL COURTS DISREGARD THIS RULE Introduction It is trite that in criminal proceedings a person cannot be tried for the same crime twice, once that person has been
More informationSettlement Agreement between the Central Bank of Ireland and Bank of Montreal Ireland p.l.c.
Settlement Agreement between the Central Bank of Ireland and Bank of Montreal Ireland p.l.c. The Central Bank of Ireland (the Central Bank ) has entered into a Settlement Agreement with effect from 21
More informationTHE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Promulgated On 21 September 2015 On 18 December Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE KOPIECZEK. Between
IAC-FH-NL-V1 Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: DC/00018/2014 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Royal Courts of Justice Determination & Reasons Promulgated On 21 September 2015
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV [2015] NZHC KIWIBANK LIMITED Defendant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV-2015-404-694 [2015] NZHC 1417 BETWEEN AND E-TRANS INTERNATIONAL FINANCE LIMITED Plaintiff KIWIBANK LIMITED Defendant Hearing: 23 April 2015 Appearances:
More informationThe Central Bank of The Bahamas. CONSULTATION PAPER: Proposed Legislation for the Regulation of Payment Systems in The Bahamas
The Central Bank of The Bahamas CONSULTATION PAPER: Proposed Legislation for the Regulation of Payment Systems in The Bahamas 24 th November, 2009 I. INTRODUCTION The Central Bank of The Bahamas has embarked
More informationIN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG L A CRUSHERS (PTY) LTD
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG In the matter between: L A CRUSHERS (PTY) LTD Not Reportable Case no: JR 1676/14 Applicant and COMMISSION FOR CONCILIATION, MEDIATION AND ARBITRATION First
More informationFinancial Services Authority
Financial Services Authority FINAL NOTICE NOTE: This prohibition order was revoked by the FCA on 03/08/2015 To: Reference Number: Of: Andrew Johnson Cumming AJC01262 Flat 51, Yvon House, London, SW11 4GA
More information