Jump to content

Ettyl


gossip1
 Share

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Gizo said:

Slap on the wrists, £200 fine.  Evens favourite. 

It doesn’t matter they only have to prove fraud and then I guess a whole new case will open up in the UK under UK Securities legislation for lying to the UK stock exchange in order to substantiate a bid that affected the market price of a listed company. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

It doesn’t matter they only have to prove fraud and then I guess a whole new case will open up in the UK under UK Securities legislation for lying to the UK stock exchange in order to substantiate a bid that affected the market price of a listed company. 

 

wow - interesting..

Edited by gossip1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, gossip1 said:

It doesn’t matter they only have to prove fraud and then I guess a whole new case will open up in the UK under UK Securities legislation for lying to the UK stock exchange in order to substantiate a bid that affected the market price of a listed company. 

wow - interesting..

There are market abuse rules which apply in the UK where parties have made take over bids for UK public companies. I’m fairly sure there is a requirement that any offer must be fully underwritten (ie, the offeror must have the means at their disposal to back up the trade). If the offer was backed by dodgy paperwork (ie, it had no real substance) I’m fairly sure the stock exchange can slam a market abuse claim against the offeror as they’ve used a false mechanism to move the market price of shares.

Page 24 of the City Takeover Code covering false markets in shares and ability to back a bid. 

https://www.gibsondunn.com/wp-content/uploads/documents/publications/CityCodeOnTakeovers-AnUpdate-June2013.pdf

Edited by BriT
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, BriT said:

There are market abuse rules which apply in the UK where parties have made take over bids for UK public companies. I’m fairly sure there is a requirement that any offer must be fully underwritten (ie, the offeror must have the means at their disposal to back up the trade). If the offer was backed by dodgy paperwork (ie, it had no real substance) I’m fairly sure the stock exchange can slam a market abuse claim against the offeror as they’ve used a false mechanism to move the market price of shares.

Page 24 of the City Takeover Code covering false markets in shares and ability to back a bid. 

https://www.gibsondunn.com/wp-content/uploads/documents/publications/CityCodeOnTakeovers-AnUpdate-June2013.pdf

Makes sense otherwise people would be making stupid baseless offers all over the place that they could profit from and then pull out. Scales is a complete Walter Mitty character. This whole thing had no substance from day one. I also heard on the grapevine that the law firm that signed off the DD is now subject to FCA penalties but I still wouldn’t put it past him to try to con the Chief Secretary into signing something he shouldn’t have. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, gossip1 said:

I think it is beyond the bounds of credibility..I am sure the prosecution would have thought of that before pressing charges

These are the people who brought the prosecution against the four anaesthetists remember.  Who gets charged and for what and who doesn't seems to be beyond the comprehension of everyone (including sometimes the Deemsters).  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Steady Eddie said:

Makes sense otherwise people would be making stupid baseless offers all over the place that they could profit from and then pull out. Scales is a complete Walter Mitty character. This whole thing had no substance from day one. I also heard on the grapevine that the law firm that signed off the DD is now subject to FCA penalties but I still wouldn’t put it past him to try to con the Chief Secretary into signing something he shouldn’t have. 

Sounds like a lot of if buts, maybes and hearsay to me!

Do you mean the IOM law firm or another?

Edited by NoTailT
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, John Wright said:

Please remember, he’s entitled to the presumption of innocence, and,  you mustn’t post anything on here that might mean that a fair trial can’t take place. One or two posts are right on the line.

For clarification:

Jason Scales is an obnoxious over caloried gobshite 

It is absolutely fine for anyone to call Jason Scales an obnoxious over caloried gobshite 

Until legal process is completed nobody can call Jason Scales a Document Forging obnoxious over caloried gobshite.

Because he might not have forged said document

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...