According to the findings of SEC inspection on the operation of SKFM whose main business is private fund management, in 2018 Mr. King, CEO and fund manager of the company at the time, acted in the following manners: (1) funneling damage incurred from investment among the clients of private funds by making cross-trade transactions of shares under trading suspension (SP) sign on a continual basis from 2015 to 2017; (2) managing private funds without taking the cli...
has to be maintained to ensure continuity of business operations.To cover potential liability risks arising from professional negligence, asset management companies are required to maintain
, allowing other persons to access client information is deemed a breach of investor confidentiality agreement, a careless, imprudent performance of duties, a negligence of investors? best interest, and
equity, (2) the additional capital to ensure business continuity, and (3) the additional capital to cover potential liability risks due to professional negligence. Actions in case of failure to meet the
the client’s instruction to cut loss when the client’s derivatives trading account hit a one-million baht loss. As a result of his negligence, the client’s account was closed and the client suffered
? responsibility for the client assets and must have provisions requiring that the companies take full responsibility for the client assets should they become lost or damaged due to the companies? negligence. The
Board Gender Diversity Improved customer insights, mission statement and goodwill in a company. Less blind spots in decision-making. Reduced negligence. Diverse solutions and more innovation. GESI
responsibility, due care and loyaltyFrom the examination of all relevant documents, it was found that the embezzlement of SECC?s assets was partly facilitated by the negligence of Kornwiwat (formerly Phaibul
branch manager at the time, whose negligence in supervising that her subordinate strictly comply with the bank’s regulations led to opportunities for committing the misconduct. Prapai’s act was deemed a
caused by {B}, the bank’s branch manager at the time, whose negligence in inspecting and supervising duty performance of {A}, her subordinate, in a reasonable and proper manner, led to opportunities for