Opposition promoted, pursuant to art. 195 of Legislative Decree no. 58/1998, against Consob resolution on the application of pecuniary administrative sanctions, Judgment n. 79/2018 of 17.01.2018 Court of Appeal of L’Aquila
Opposition promoted, pursuant to art. 195 of Legislative Decree no. 58/1998 against the Consob resolution no. 19456 of 4.12.2015 for the application of pecuniary administrative sanctions
Asked for the annulment of the Consob resolution 4 December 2015, n. 19456 or, in the alternative, the reduction of the penalty to the minimum edict
With the resolution the following violations had been challenged:
1b) Violation of the combined provisions of art. 21, paragraph 1, letter d) of the TUF and art. 15 of the joint Bank of Italy / Consob Regulation of October 29, 2007, as well as of the art. 21 paragraph 1, letter a), of the TUF and of the articles 39 and 40 of Consob Regulation no. 16190 of October 29, 2007, as there emerged, in the context of the assessment of the adequacy of the investments, procedural shortcomings that allowed anomalies to occur in the mapping of the risk of the subordinated issuance of the Bank (period of the violation: July 1, 2009 – 4 May 2012, with regard to irregularities relating to the profiling of Bank products);
2) violation of the combined provisions of art. 21, paragraph 1 letter d) of the TUF, of art. 15 paragraphs 1 and 2 letter e) and of the art. 29 of the joint Bank of Italy / Consob Regulation of 29 October 2007 for not adopting the Bank procedures, including control procedures, suitable for ensuring the correct performance of investment services and for not having held, for all services provided and all transactions carried out, adequate and orderly records of the activities carried out, with particular reference to trading on own securities which, despite being accompanied by verbal repurchase commitments on a pre-established date, have however been recorded in the Bank’s official documentation as firm transactions (period of violation: February 1, 2009 – May 4, 2012);
3) violation of Article 21, paragraph 1-bis, letter a), of the TUF and of the articles 23 and 25 of the joint Bank of Italy / Consob Regulation of 29 October, in order to have the Bank, as part of the placement of its own securities, failed to identify and adequately manage the conflicts of interest that already existed in the plant and in the objectives of the transaction, have assumed even greater importance and size due to specific commercial initiatives and pressure on the distribution network (period of the violation: February 1, 2009 – May 4, 2012), and a penalty of € …. for each contested violation, for a total of € … .. each.
Consob established itself, asking for the rejection of the opposition.
The Court of Appeal of L’Aquila has reduced the penalty applied to …. to € …. for each of the three violations and, therefore, to the total amount of € … rejecting the opposition in the rest.
13/03/2018
Source Consob
