trading decisions on behalf of the clients, regardless of the client's permission or authorization. In this regard, {A}'s action was deemed as obtaining authorization from clients to make securities trading
capital market investment consultant for 3 months, effective from June 16, 2015.The investment consultant is unable to make any trading decisions on behalf of the client even with the client's permission
} assured his colleague that it was the client’s decision. Therefore, the transaction had been executed. However, when the authorization documents were brought to the client for signature, the client
orders of derivatives and shares in large volumes without the client’s authorization. When the client’s account suffered a large amount of loss, {A} tricked the client into depositing more cash into the
securities trading account without any written authorization from the account owner. He admitted that both clients were siblings and the account owner asked her brother to submit trading orders without prior
suggestions of the private sector and stakeholders who took part in the previous hearing on the governing prinicples.Key points of revision include (1) permission for mutual funds offered for sale to
Court to grant a permission for the assessment of the value of mining property rights and thus could not disclose the information within the original deadline. EARTH has already requested a permission
underlyings. The key areas of revision are: (1) more detailed disclosure of the criteria for DW price setting to give investors sufficient information for decision making, and (2) permission for foreign stocks
Bangkok, February 25, 2015 ? The SEC suspended {A}, a capital market investment consultant of Kasikorn Securities Plc. for obtaining authorization to make derivatives and securities trading decisions
? behalf. With the said authorization, he traded with high trading volume for a period of time. {A} admitted to Maybank Kim Eng Securities that he used clients' User IDs and passwords to send trading orders