AMF France v. X, A (insider trading, 2010)

Dismissed

✓ 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-2010-29-insider-trading-2010) by email

In November 2010 the AMF's Commission des sanctions cleared an independent film group and its chief executive of insider dealing over a sale of treasury shares in late 2008, before the group announced an 11 per cent fall in nine-month sales, because the extra information was not shown to be price-sensitive.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

—

Disgorgement

—

Prejudgment interest

—

Total relief

—

Alleged gain

—

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.

What is alleged to have happened

The Commission des sanctions of the Autorité des marchés financiers (AMF, France) decided the case on 25 November 2010. The respondents were a listed film-distribution group, X, and its chairman and chief executive, M. A.

The AMF's market surveillance had found that the company sold 2,276,206 of its own shares between 31 October and 10 November 2008 and only then, on 14 November 2008, announced an 11 per cent fall in sales for the first three quarters. The sale brought in 319,939.55 euros and saved an estimated 46,794 euros. The notifications of February 2010 alleged that, in selling, the company and A had breached their duty to abstain while knowing that unpublished information.

The Commission examined whether that information was inside information. It noted that the market had already been told on 14 August and 30 September 2008 that sales targets were being cut, and that the share price had been drifting down and reacted little to the 14 November release. It concluded that the limited addition was not shown to be capable of having a significant effect on the price, so the breach was not established. It put both respondents out of the case.

This record does not show whether the decision was appealed or the identity of the group, which is anonymised in the published text. A clearance is a finding that the breach was not established, not that the sale was proper.

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. 2010-11-25 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.