AMF France v. Sofra and A (insider trading, 2016)

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-2016-06-insider-trading-2016) by email

In April 2016 the AMF Commission des sanctions fined an individual, published as A, 25,000 euros and his property company Sofra 5,000 euros over sales of Europlasma shares in early 2013 and undeclared transactions.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

—

Disgorgement

—

Prejudgment interest

—

Total relief

—

Alleged gain

—

Penalty as published

€30k

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 2nd section of the Commission des sanctions decided this case on 27 April 2016. The AMF's inquiry, opened in October 2013, concerned Europlasma, whose trading was suspended in April 2013 while it sought a conciliation procedure with its lenders. Notifications of grievances were sent on 21 May 2015 to an individual, published as A, and to the property company Sofra.

The AMF alleged that A used inside information about Europlasma's very weak cash position by selling 45,000 shares between 20 February and 14 March 2013, of which 40,000 were sold for Sofra and 5,000 for himself, avoiding an estimated loss of 19,022 euros. It also alleged that the sales were not declared, as the rules required of a person closely linked to a manager.

The Commission did not retain the insider-dealing grievance as to the 40,000 shares sold for Sofra against A, and it found that Sofra had failed to declare its sales. It imposed 25,000 euros on A and 5,000 euros on Sofra, a total of 30,000 euros.

The record does not show which part of the insider-dealing allegation was upheld for the 5,000 shares sold personally in 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.

• Insider trading — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.

Timeline

1. 2016-04-27 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.