ValueBuddies.com : Value Investing Forum - Singapore, Hong Kong, U.S.

It took about 6 years to conclude a civil case by MAS, but the penalty is pretty heavy...

MAS takes civil penalty actions against two for insider trading

SINGAPORE: The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) has imposed civil penalties on Mr Lim Oon Cheng and his niece, Ms Lim Huey Yih, for contravening the Securities and Futures Act (SFA), said MAS in a media release on Wednesday (Apr 29).

Between May 15 and May 22, 2009, Mr Lim purchased 2.27 million shares in Singapore Petroleum Company (SPC) and 101,000 shares in Keppel Corporation (KCL) while in possession of price-sensitive and non-public information relating to PetroChina International (Singapore)’s (PIPL) acquisition of SPC shares from KCL and PIPL’s mandatory general offer for SPC shares.

Ms Lim purchased 892,000 shares in SPC over the same period while also in possession of this pricesensitive and non-public information. The Share Acquisition and the Mandatory General Offer were subsequently announced on May 24, 2009.

In addition, Mr Lim entered an order on May 19, 2009 to sell 300,000 shares in SPC at the intra-day high of S$4.39 without any intention to fulfill the order. This created a false and misleading appearance in the market for SPC shares, said MAS.

Mr Lim made a profit of more than S$3.8 million and Ms Lim a profit of almost S$900,000 from their insider trading activities.

Mr Lim has admitted to contravening sections 219(2)(a) and 197(1)(b) of the SFA and has agreed to pay a civil penalty of S$9.597 million, comprising S$9.547 million for insider trading and S$50,000 for false trading. Ms Lim has admitted to contravening section 219(2)(1) of the SFA and has agreed to pay a civil penalty of S$2.241 million for insider trading.

- CNA/eg

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/sing...14314.html

Is like peanut to the family. Tell me they really turn over a new leaf and not finding safer way to do it. It likely tip of the iceberg.
Many rich people becomes rich not because they are smart but more due to connections to do funny things not easily caught.

We should learn from European countries. I think is Norway that penalty should be percentage of Networth for white collar crimes !

"Ms Lim Huey Yih" - IF it is the same woman. in oil and gas industry.

http://www.oceantankers.com.sg/pdf/sp-ocean-hero.pdf

http://ssa.wm.tm/index.cfm?GPID=307&Print=1 << no. 11 on the list.

I guess a small fry cannot pay the 3X fine.

(30-04-2015, 11:58 AM)corydorus Wrote: [ -> ]Is like peanut to the family. Tell me they really turn over a new leaf and not finding safer way to do it. It likely tip of the iceberg.
Many rich people becomes rich not because they are smart but more due to connections to do funny things not easily caught.

We should learn from European countries. I think is Norway that penalty should be percentage of Networth for white collar crimes !

No need. Just send them to jail, no civil penalties and mandatory jail term.

I think Norway's penalty policy for white collar crimes make sense.

The below caught my attention:

-- entered an order on May 19, 2009 to sell 300,000 shares in SPC at the intra-day high of S$4.39 without any intention to fulfill the order. This created a false and misleading appearance in the market --

How to establish no intention to fulfill the sell order. There is no way to block any buyer who are willing to trade at the keyed to-sell price. Take to extreme, does this mean that any person who placed a sell order at the intra-day high, may be liable for creating a false and misleading appearance in the market, if the sell order was not executed at the end of the day?

Probably, some key details have been left out in this news article. Thinking aloud.

(30-04-2015, 02:08 PM)Yoyo Wrote: [ -> ]The below caught my attention:

-- entered an order on May 19, 2009 to sell 300,000 shares in SPC at the intra-day high of S$4.39 without any intention to fulfill the order. This created a false and misleading appearance in the market --

How to establish no intention to fulfill the sell order. There is no way to block any buyer who are willing to trade at the keyed to-sell price. Take to extreme, does this mean that any person who placed a sell order at the intra-day high, may be liable for creating a false and misleading appearance in the market, if the sell order was not executed at the end of the day?

Probably, some key details have been left out in this news article. Thinking aloud.

He keyed in to sell but no intention to fulfill the order ? What if someone booked from the sellers ? No need to honour the order ?

^^^ he can be queuing at 4.38 and below to BUY. Probably his general pattern of all his transactions for the period is to accumulate daily.

Usually the dead giveaway for insider trading is big purchases of a new counter just before an Offer.

BTW knowing price-sensitive and non-public information is not illegal. It is TRADING on the info that is illegal.

Hope they also investigate in Olam and come out with their findings .

Hi opmi

Thanks for your note.

So he can be queuing 300 lots to sell at $4.39, and at the same time queuing to buy at $4.38 and/or below to accumulate. The sell order serves to force other sellers to release at $4.38 or below as there is already a sell queue (unfulfilled) at $4.39, if they are eager to sell, thereby causing a false and misleading appearance (on the real supply). The wording "without any intention to fulfill the order" is irrelevant.

This makes more sense now. But I suspect this may have already been practised by some traders in their normal trading, to facilitate their share accumulation. Does this also qualify as creating false and misleading appearance in the market - false trading?