AMF France v. EuropaCorp, X and Y (false or misleading information, 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-2014-20-market-abuse-2014) by email

In October 2014 the AMF Commission des sanctions fined EuropaCorp 200,000 euros over the way its consolidated accounts described a cost-accounting rule, and put its two auditors out of the case on charges of spreading misleading information. No trading was alleged.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

—

Disgorgement

—

Prejudgment interest

—

Total relief

—

Alleged gain

—

Penalty as published

€200k

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 1st section of the Commission des sanctions decided this case on 27 October 2014, after the AMF's board sent notifications of grievances on 21 February 2013 to the film producer EuropaCorp and its two statutory auditors, published as X and Y.

The grievances were that EuropaCorp gave the public inaccurate, imprecise or misleading information in a press release of 15 April 2010 and in its consolidated accounts for the years to 31 March 2009 and 2010, and that the auditors spread inaccurate information through their reports on those accounts, which the AMF treated as a breach of the rule against disseminating false or misleading information.

The Commission rejected most of the sub-grievances, including a challenge about the valuation of a software asset. It found a breach only in the way the accounting rule on preliminary costs was set out in the notes to the consolidated accounts. It put both auditors out of the case and imposed a financial penalty of 200,000 euros on EuropaCorp.

The record is about financial reporting rather than trading. It does not show any trading by anyone, and it does not show whether the decision was appealed.

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

1. 2014-10-27 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.