The 2014 decision of the European Court of Human Rights in the case ?Grande Stevens
and Others v. Italy? raises numerous complex issues concerning the regulation of market abuses in Italy, Europe, and also in other systems.
The broad questions that the Court of Strasburg addresses, specifically concerning the nature of administrative sanctions and civil penalties, due process in administrative sanctioning procedures, and double jeopardy issues when both criminal and civil sanctions can be inflicted, not only are extremely relevant practically for the current and future regulation of insider trading and market manipulation, but also open a more theoretical discussion on the relationships between the only apparently unrelated fields of human rights and enforcement in financial markets. This Article offers an analysis of the decision, also in the light of future developments due to the recent reform of European law on market abuse, and compares this landmark European decision with corresponding U.S. case law.
This Article shows that a variety of fundamental rules of corporate law are based on a set of myths. The Article explains that these myths play an important role in attracting public acceptance and support for what otherwise would be unpopular...Read more
This article deals with the self-insider, i.e. the possible creation of the inside information by a person and its (abusive) exploitation. It describes the situation in Italy and Germany and then provides a taxonomy of the several cases of...Read more
Mechanisms of market inefficiency are some of the most important and least understood institutions in financial markets today. A growing body of empirical work reveals a strong and persistent demand for “safe assets,” financial instruments that...Read more
This study examines the challenge of implicit communications - qualitative statements, tone, and non-verbal cues - to the effectiveness of enforcing corporate disclosure regulations. We use Regulation FD setting, given that SEC adopted the...Read more