[Shubham Sancheti is a 4th year B.A., LL.B. (Hons.) student at NALSAR University of Law in Hyderabad] The Securities and Exchange Board of India (“SEBI”) recently availed an opportunity to interpret regulation 37(6) of the SEBI (Listing Obligation and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2015 (“LODR Regulations”). It provided an interesting yet contestable interpretation of the regulation...
Understanding the Dichotomy between Materiality and Price Sensitivity: Where to Draw the Line?
[Anuj Bansal is a 5th year B.A. L.L.B. (Hons.) student at the Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University, Lucknow] The approach of the securities law adjudicatory bodies, as observable through the orders on insider trading, has often given rise to an interesting issue of much academic relevance: what distinguishes ‘price sensitive information’ under SEBI (Prohibition of Insider Trading)...
Sharing of Unpublished Price Sensitive Information with Promoters
[Shikha Rawal is an Associate at a law firm in Mumbai. The views in this post are personal.] In June this year, the Securities and Exchange Board of India (“SEBI”) constituted a committee under the Chairmanship of Mr. Uday Kotak (“Kotak Committee”) to propose reforms to regulations governing listed companies. After careful deliberations, the Kotak Committee submitted a report on October 5, 2017...
SEBI Clarifies Scope of Embargo Against Share Issuances Following Delisting
Companies that are undertaking a delisting of equity shares must be prepared to endure an embargo that would prevent them from listing their shares for a further period of time (five or ten years, depending upon the circumstances). Such a restriction is contained in regulation 30(1) of the SEBI (Delisting of Equity Shares) Regulations, 2009. This is to prevent companies from retreating the...
Does Section 11B of the SEBI Act Envisage ‘Non-Compliance’ of Directions? – Part I
[Rahul Sibal is a 4th Year student and Deep Shah a 3rd Year student of NALSAR Hyderabad] Background In March this year, the Securities and Exchange Board of India (‘SEBI’) confirmed an interesting interim order that was passed last year. The interim order (the ‘Order’) impounded profits that Beejay Investments derived from trading in securities, with such profits being termed as ‘unlawful gains’...
Anti-Dilution and Rights Issue: On the Right Side of the Law?
[Job Michael Mathew is a 4th year BA.LL.B (Hons) student at NALSAR University of Law. He may be reached at [email protected]] This post examines whether the instrument of rights issue can be used by unlisted companies in enforcing anti-dilution provisions which may be one of terms in a shareholders’ agreement with a foreign investor. Put simply, anti-dilution means compensating the investor...
Categorization of Pledge Under SEBI’s Insider Trading Regulations, 1992: Arguments against the Tide
[Parth Dixit is a 4th Year, BA/LLB (Hons.) student at Symbiosis Law School, Pune.] By way of its order dated August 11, 2017 in the case of SRSR Holdings Private Limited v. Securities and Exchange Board of India, the Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) has provided a degree of finality to an important question raised in the aftermath of the infamous Satyam scam of 2009-2010. The question was...
SEBI: Rules on Profit Sharing Arrangements Apply to Unlisted Subsidiaries
The rules introduced earlier this year by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (“SEBI”) that impose restrictions on profit sharing arrangements in respect of listed companies have already provoked interpretational controversies. In an earlier informal guidance (relating to Accelya Kale Solutions Limited), SEBI clarified profit sharing arrangements that involved employees being provided...
SEBI Circular on Minimum Public Shareholding
[Sarthak Karol is an associate at a law firm in Mumbai] By way of a Circular dated October 10, 2017, (“Circular”), the Securities and Exchange Board of India (“SEBI”) issued directions to stock exchanges to come down heavily on listed entities, their promoters and directors who are in breach of the 25% minimum public shareholding (“MPS”) norms mandated under regulation 38 of the SEBI (Listing...
The Supreme Court’s Liberal Interpretation of the SEBI Regulations on Fraudulent Trade Practices
[Jitesh Maheshwari is an Associate at Mindspright Legal in Mumbai] Introduction The Supreme Court last month passed a landmark judgment in SEBI v. Shri Kanaiyalal Baldevbhai Patel in which front running by a non-intermediary has been bought within the prohibition of the SEBI (Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices Relating to Securities Market) Regulations, 2003 (the “PFUTP...
Recent Comments