Market Manipulation. Search

OSC v. David De Gouveia (wash trading, 2014)

Status unknown

Checked against the primary document on October 2, 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, with sampled and disputed records read a second time. 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 (osc-david-de-gouveia-wash-trading-2014) by email

In 2014, the regulator brought an action against David De Gouveia, alleging conduct this library classifies as wash trading. The release does not state a monetary figure that we were able to extract.

The record

Structured fields for this action, as recorded in our case library.
Agency OSC
Date filed 2014-02-18
Date resolved 2014-04-24
Court Capital Markets Tribunal (Ontario)
Status unknown
Criminal parallel No
Defendants David De Gouveia (individual)
Techniques Wash trading

What was ordered

Civil penalty
—
Disgorgement
—
Prejudgment interest
—
Total relief
—
Alleged gain
—
Penalty as published
C$75k

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 CAD. 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 regulator announced this matter on February 18, 2014. The respondents named are David De Gouveia (1 individual, 0 entities). The action was brought in the Capital Markets Tribunal (Ontario).

This library tags the matter as wash trading, based on the conduct the regulator describes. Each tag links to a page explaining how that technique works, what statute it engages, and what penalties comparable actions have attracted. The tagging is ours, not the regulator's: agencies charge statutory provisions, not technique names.

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 release.

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. 2014-02-18 Notice of Hearing
  2. 2014-02-18 Statement of Allegations
  3. 2014-03-19 Reasons and Decision
  4. 2014-04-24 Reasons and Decision
  5. 2014-04-24 Reasons and 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. Gotbit Consulting LLC a/k/a Gotbit Hedge Fund and Fedor Kedrov (paid crypto market making, 2026) SEC 2026-08-03 Paid Crypto Market Making , Wash Trading — settled
SEC v. Justin Sun, Tron Foundation Limited, BitTorrent Foundation Ltd., Rainberry, Inc., and DeAndre Cortez Way (wash trading, 2026) SEC 2026-03-05 Wash Trading $10m settled
Victorian man sentenced in market manipulation case (ASIC, 2025) ASIC 2025-12-12 Price Manipulation , Wash Trading — judgment
CFTC v. Shinhan Securities Co. Ltd. (wash trading, 2025) CFTC 2025-09-17 Wash Trading $213k judgment
SEC v. Suyun Gu, et al. (wash trading, 2025) SEC 2025-07-21 Wash Trading $622k judgment
Victorian man charged over alleged market manipulation (ASIC, 2025) ASIC 2025-03-14 Price Manipulation , Wash Trading — judgment

Record added September 10, 2026. submit a correction.