AMF France v. Jefferies International Ltd (spoofing, 2020)
Settled
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.
In October 2020 the AMF agreed a settlement with Jefferies International over 192 sequences in 2015 in which its traders allegedly used large orders cancelled within seconds to move the Euro-OAT futures book; it agreed to pay EUR 300,000.
The record
| Agency | AMF (France) |
|---|---|
| Date filed | 2020-10-29 |
| Date resolved | 2020-10-29 |
| Court | Commission des sanctions (AMF, France) |
| Status | settled |
| Asset class | futures, bonds |
| Instruments | Euro-OAT (French government bond) futures (FOAT) |
| Venue | Eurex |
| Criminal parallel | No |
| Defendants | Jefferies International Ltd |
| Techniques | Spoofing |
What was ordered
- Civil penalty
- —
- Disgorgement
- —
- Prejudgment interest
- —
- Total relief
- —
- Alleged gain
- —
- Penalty as published
- €300k
What is alleged to have happened
The AMF published an administrative settlement (accord de composition administrative) with Jefferies International Ltd, dated 29 October 2020. This is not a contested sanctions hearing. The agreement took effect only once the AMF Collège validated it and the Commission des sanctions homologated it; the document gives the signing date but not the homologation date, so the signing date is used here.
The AMF opened an investigation in February 2017 into the Euro-OAT future (FOAT) from January 2015. Jefferies, the UK subsidiary of a US bank, makes markets in it. The agreement says Eurex had flagged the orders on 20 August 2015.
The AMF described 192 sequences between 26 March and 13 October 2015 in what it called flash spoofing. Traders placed large passive orders of more than 200 contracts (average market order size under 5) close to the best price on one side, which were seldom executed (4.8%); placed smaller orders on the other side that executed far more often (30.9%); then cancelled at least 95% of the large orders. The imbalances lasted 1.9 seconds on average. The AMF said this let Jefferies deal without crossing the spread, with a gain in every sequence; investigators estimated the market impact at about EUR 38,000.
Jefferies said the agreement is neither an admission of guilt nor a sanction, that it ordered the traders to stop in August 2015 and has since tightened its controls. It agreed to pay EUR 300,000 to the Treasury.
What the record does not show: the agreement describes conduct that the person "could" or "would" have committed, so it records allegations and undertakings, not a finding of breach, and it is not styled as a fine. It does not show whether any later challenge occurred.
This library tags the matter as spoofing. 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.
- Spoofing — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
Timeline
Primary documents
Everything on this page derives from the documents below. Where our summary and the primary document disagree, the primary document is right.
Related actions
Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.
| Action | Agency | Filed | Technique | Penalty | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SEC v. Frank M. Cerisano Jr. (spoofing, 2026) | SEC | 2026-08-10 | Spoofing | $335k | settled |
| SEC v. Mingran Wang (spoofing, 2026) | SEC | 2026-06-25 | Spoofing | — | settled |
| CFTC v. Sidney Lebental (spoofing, 2026) | CFTC | 2026-05-06 | Spoofing | $200k | judgment |
| CFTC v. Gregg Smith and Michael Nowak (spoofing, 2026) | CFTC | 2026-01-16 | Spoofing | $350k | judgment |
| SEBI v. Manish Mishra and others (YouTube promotion of GG Engineering, 2025) | SEBI (India) | 2025-12-19 | Social Media Ramps , Spoofing | — | judgment |
| SEC v. Artur Khachatryan (spoofing, 2025) | SEC | 2025-12-16 | Spoofing | $112k | settled |