derivatives trading decisions on the client's behalf. Upon her client's inquiry, she then informed the client of the transactions which the orders had already been entered or executed. {A} had obtained such
Act of 1992 with the following offences: (1) For her responsibility over PICNI operations in 2004 when she jointly made changes to the contracts to let bottling plants owned by her families or under her
review responsibility of her audit group. She had the authorized access to view the draft financial statements in the EY information system and disclosed the inside information of the three companies to
derivatives trading account in order to continue trading. She later made a summary trading report under the client’s account and sent it to the client for acknowledgement. In so doing, she concealed the trading
securities investment consultants, had committed wrongful acts against clients at various branch offices as follows: (1) In the case of Miss Surasa Mungthaworn, it was found that she had
) using her personal mobile phone, together with the username and the password she had created, to execute trading transactions via the Internet, and (2) making trading orders via MBKET’s trading
subscription order of a client without contacting or giving advice to the client. She admitted having done so without providing details on the fund to the client. The SEC has therefore imposed a 40-day
a trading order from the client's securities trading account without her client's order. {A} admitted doing such action, reasoning that she was unable to contact the client at the time the share
? written authorization. She also arranged payments for traded securities ordered by other individuals. Moreover, the SEC found that Meaunchit had requested to transfer trading transactions to the company?s
) Plc., committed dishonest acts during 2006-2008. She deceived a foreign investor into affixing his signature on a blank securities withdrawal/transfer form, claiming that the client could not receive