Market Manipulation. Search

AMF France v. ISA Finances, NG Investments, Ormylia, Socodol, UBS (France) and others (insider trading, 2015)

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-2015-11-insider-trading-2015) by email

In June 2015 the AMF Commission des sanctions sanctioned supervisory-board members of Riber and linked traders and companies, and UBS (France), with penalties totalling 3.55 million euros, mainly for dealing on or passing on inside information about orders received by Riber.

The record

Structured fields for this action, as recorded in our case library.
Agency AMF (France)
Release number SAN-2015-11
Date filed 2015-06-02
Date resolved 2015-06-02
Court Commission des sanctions (AMF, France)
Status judgment
Asset class equities
Instruments Riber shares
Venue Euronext Paris
Criminal parallel No
Defendants J (individual) ; NG Investments (entity) ; K (individual) ; Ormylia (entity) ; M (individual) ; N (individual) ; International Society Activities Finances (ISA Finances) (entity) ; Socodol (entity) ; L (individual) ; UBS (France) (entity) ; A (individual)
Techniques Insider trading

What was ordered

Civil penalty
—
Disgorgement
—
Prejudgment interest
—
Total relief
—
Alleged gain
—
Penalty as published
€3.6m

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 Commission des sanctions decided this case on 2 June 2015. The AMF's board decided on 26 November 2013 to notify grievances to ten respondents, among them members of the supervisory board of Riber, a maker of semiconductor equipment listed on Euronext Paris, and people and companies linked to them, plus the bank UBS (France).

The grievances were that J, a supervisory board member, and his investment company NG Investments traded Riber shares while holding inside information; that M passed inside information to K, who traded through his company Ormylia; that several of them failed to declare transactions and ownership thresholds; and that UBS (France) failed to report suspicious orders.

The Commission found that J and NG Investments bought 60,124 shares in December 2010 while J held information about two orders received by Riber, and that K and Ormylia bought 59,549 shares on 21 December 2010 on information passed by M, with a potential gain of about 5,359 euros. It sanctioned the respondents, and some threshold-declaration grievances were not retained against M.

It imposed financial penalties of 70,000 euros on J, 30,000 euros on NG Investments, 800,000 euros on K, 200,000 euros on Ormylia, 1,000,000 euros on M, 100,000 euros on N, 200,000 euros on ISA Finances, 200,000 euros on Socodol, 600,000 euros on L and 350,000 euros on UBS (France), a total of 3,550,000 euros, and gave a warning to A.

The record does not show the basis for each individual amount in full detail, and it does not show whether the decision was appealed.

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.

Timeline

  1. 2015-06-02 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.

The linked release is published by the issuing regulator under its own terms. Our summary and narrative above are our own writing.

Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.

Action Agency Filed Technique Penalty Status
SEC v. Trijya Vakil and Neeraj Visen (insider trading, 2026) SEC 2026-09-04 Insider Trading $109k settled
CFTC v. Gabriel Perez (insider trading, 2026) CFTC 2026-08-28 Insider Trading $65k judgment
SEC v. Gavin Wolfe and others (insider trading, 2026) SEC 2026-08-21 Insider Trading — filed
SEC v. Jesse R. Mitchell (insider trading, 2026) SEC 2026-08-21 Insider Trading — filed
SEBI v. Arun Kumar Somani and others (insider trading review, Indian Oil Corporation, 2026) SEBI (India) 2026-08-13 Insider Trading — dismissed
SEC v. Benjamin Tesfaye (insider trading, 2026) SEC 2026-08-11 Insider Trading $18.7k settled

Record added October 5, 2026. submit a correction.