OSC v. Peter Volk (2018)

Settled

✓ 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-peter-volk-2018) by email

In 2018 the Ontario Securities Commission approved a settlement with Peter Volk, general counsel of Pacific Rubiales (later Frontera) Energy, who bought US$100,000 par value of the company's notes in February 2015 while aware of takeover interest. He was reprimanded and ordered to pay C$10,000 in costs. The conduct was alleged to be contrary to the public interest, not a breach of the insider trading prohibition.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

—

Disgorgement

—

Prejudgment interest

—

Total relief

—

Alleged gain

—

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.

What is alleged to have happened

The Ontario Securities Commission filed its statement of allegations and the settlement on June 8, 2018 and approved it on June 13, 2018.

Volk, who supervised the company's insider trading policy, bought US$100,000 par value of senior unsecured notes for US$75,349.31 on February 13, 2015, after self-assessing under the policy that he held no material undisclosed information. At the time he knew of a non-binding expression of interest from Harbour in acquiring the company. Staff said the prudent course for a general counsel was to refrain and that his conduct fell below the standard expected, creating at least an appearance of misuse of confidential information.

The order reprimands him and requires C$10,000 in costs; there is no administrative penalty. Because the allegation is conduct contrary to the public interest and not a section 76 contravention, the insider-trading tag has been removed.

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.

Timeline

1. 2018-06-08 Settlement Agreement
2. 2018-06-08 Statement of Allegations
3. 2018-06-13 Other
4. 2018-06-13 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.

• Tribunal proceeding
• Settlement Agreement
• Statement of Allegations
• Other
• Reasons and Decision

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

Record added September 10, 2026. submit a correction.