securities brokerage without a license in violation of Section 90 of the Securities and Exchange Act B.E. 2535 (1992) in corroboration with Section 83 of the Criminal Code. Concurrently, the SEC filed

. According to the Derivatives Act B.E. 2546 (2003), any person undertaking derivatives business without obtaining proper authorization from the SEC is in violation of Section 16 of the Act. In addition, the

: www.mpf.co.id, www.ascotfx.com and www.maxglobalbullion.com.From the SEC?s finding, these firms operated a derivatives business without license or registration with the SEC, in violation of Section 16 of the

orders where the purchase were initially paid by her family's money and later by her own money.Using client's account to trade securities for her own benefits was in violation to the Notifications of

behalf of clients were in violation of the Notifications of Capital Market Supervisory Board concerning personnel in the capital market*, the SEC therefore suspended {A} from her duty as the approved

behalf of client and seeking benefits from the client during the performance of duties were in violation of the Notifications of Capital Market Supervisory Board concerning personnel in the capital market

were in violation of the Notifications of Capital Market Supervisory Board concerning personnel in the capital market*. The SEC, therefore, suspended Acting Subbieutant Saroj from his duty as the

investment units in the portion yet to satisfy the minimum of 5 year investment.The said action was a violation of conditions prescribed by the Revenue Department, causing the client to pay back tax deductions

trading order and the similar failure was found during the second investigation, in case of another client. Failure to record the securities trading orders was in violation of the Notifications of Capital

which were investment in gold futures, not spot gold. Accordingly, the actions of G.O.L. (Thailand) were in violation of the Derivatives Act B.E. 2546 (2003), Section 16, subject to sanctions under