AMF France v. F, G, H and I (insider dealing, 2014)

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-2014-07-insider-trading-2014) by email

On 16 May 2014 the Commission des sanctions found that three traders used inside information on IBM's offer for ILOG, passed on by a bank employee (G), and that one of them also acted ahead of SAP's bid for Business Objects. It fined them EUR 800,000, EUR 600,000, EUR 400,000 and EUR 17,000, EUR 1.817 million in total.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

—

Disgorgement

—

Prejudgment interest

—

Total relief

—

Alleged gain

—

Penalty as published

€1.8m

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 first section of the Commission des sanctions of the Autorité des marchés financiers (AMF) decided the case on 16 May 2014. The decision is anonymised: F, G, H and I are individuals. F worked in trading and sales at Crédit Libanais in Beirut, I worked at SAP and G was an employee of UBS Ltd.

On 28 July 2008 ILOG, listed on Euronext Paris, and IBM announced an agreement for IBM's takeover offer at EUR 10 a share. The AMF found unusual trading before the announcement and opened an investigation in November 2008, extended in December 2009 to I's earlier trade in the American depositary shares of Business Objects, which SAP had said on 7 October 2007 it would bid for. The notifications of grievances alleged that F, H and I used inside information on the ILOG offer, that G passed it to F, and that I also used inside information on SAP's offer for Business Objects.

The Commission found each breach made out. It put F's gain at EUR 334,680 on the ILOG trade, H's at EUR 8,400, and I's at EUR 233,415 on ILOG and EUR 99,970 on the Business Objects ADSs, and treated I's use of two separate pieces of information obtained through his work as aggravating, as it did G's transmission of information he held as an employee of a bank.

It fined F EUR 800,000, I EUR 600,000, G EUR 400,000 and H EUR 17,000, EUR 1,817,000 in total, and ordered publication.

This record does not show whether the decision was appealed or any criminal proceedings; the text as read here mentions none. The earlier false-rumours tag is not supported by the decision.

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. 2014-05-16 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.