23 October 2023

Heavy sanction imposed by the French Financial Market Authority (AMF) for market manipulation

In its decision of 7 September 2023, the Enforcement Committee of the “Autorité des marchés financiers” ("AMF") fined the French company Rallye €25 million and its CEO at the time €1 million respectively, for market manipulation by disseminating false or misleading information about Rallye's financial situation


In this case, the AMF Board (Collège) had brought charges against the two defendants, the listed company Rallye, parent company of Casino, and its CEO at the time of the events, Mr. Hattab, for dissemination of “false or misleading information likely to fix the Rallye share price at an abnormal or artificial level“. The Enforcement Committee upheld all the notified grievances (I), considered that the CEO was also liable thereof (II) and imposed high penalties (III).


I. The Enforcement Committee considered that Rallye’s financial communications in 2017 and 2018 constituted market manipulation by dissemination of false or misleading information likely to fix Rallye’s share price at an abnormal or artificial level


The Enforcement Committee considered that Rallye had disseminated false or misleading information which gave investors a more favorable image of its liquidity situation than it truly was, in particular by describing this situation as “solid” or “very solid“, whereas its liquidity situation was dependent on the Casino share price, which was highly volatile and subject to persistent downward pressure.[1]

The Enforcement Committee decided that, on 11 occasions and in 14 different communication media between March 2018 and May 2019, Rallye’s communication regarding its liquidity situation had constituted market manipulation in breach of Articles 12.1, c), 12.4 and 15 of the MAR Regulation.[2]

Pursuant to Article 12.1, c) of the MAR Regulation, the communication at stake met the 4 criteria of market manipulation which are[3]:

  • Dissemination of information;
  • The false or misleading nature of this information;
  • The fact that they must fix or be likely to fix “at an abnormal or artificial level the price of one or more financial instruments“;
  • Knowledge, proven or supposed, of their false or misleading nature on the part of the respondent.

Firstly, it was not disputed that all the documents in question had been distributed and contained the disputed information criticized in the statements of objections.[4]

Concerning the false or misleading nature of this information, the documents published by Rallye incorrectly presented its liquidity situation as “solid” or even “very solid“, based on more than 1.7 billion euros of “confirmed and unused” credit lines at the end of 2017 and in the first half of 2018, and 1.3 billion at the end of 2018.[5] However, the full amount of these lines was not available, especially as the cash collateral mechanism in place was likely to result in a significant reduction without this being brought to the attention of investors.[6]

This information was considered misleading by the Enforcement Committee, as it contributed to giving investors a more favorable image of Rallye’s liquidity than was truly the case.[7]

In addition, the Enforcement Committee found that the information at stake was likely to set “at an abnormal or artificial level the price of one or more financial instruments“[8], at a higher level than it truly was[9], even though liquidity risk was the financial risk to which Rallye was most exposed due to its debts and maturities to be honored, and this aspect was the focus of investors’ attention.[10]

Lastly, the Enforcement Committee found that Rallye knew or should have known that the information published was erroneous, in that “the issuer is responsible for information published in its name and on its behalf by one of its bodies or representatives“[11], in this case its CEO Mr. Franck Hattab.


II. The Enforcement Committee found the CEO liable for market manipulation


The Committee found that, in its capacity of as CEO and head of financial communications at the time of the events, Mr. Franck Hattab was also liable for these market manipulations, pursuant to article 12.4 of the MAR Regulation.[12]

Based on this Article, the Enforcement Committee can sanction any natural person who takes part in the decision to carry out activities on behalf of the legal entity at stake.[13]

In particular, the Commission noted that Mr. Franck Hattab was CEO and was responsible for financial communications throughout the period of the wrongful communications. He was in charge of the company’s financial communication and, as such, “knew, or at least should have known, that the information disseminated by Rallye concerning its financial situation was false or misleading“.[14]

As a result, according to the Enforcement Committee, Mr. Frank Hattab qualified as a natural person taking “part in the decision to carry out activities on behalf of the legal entity concerned within the meaning of Article 12.4 of the MAR Regulation“, so that “Rallye’s breaches of the provisions of Articles 12.1, c) and 15 of the MAR Regulation in connection with the information it disseminated between March 8th, 2018 and May 15th, 2019 are consequently attributable to Mr. Hattab on the basis of Article 12.4 of the same regulation“.[15]


III. High financial penalties justified by the repetition of the facts at issue and the damage caused to investors


The Enforcement Committee imposed a substantial fine of 25 million euros on Rallye and 1 million euros on its former CEO.

In particular, the Committee noted the seriousness of these breaches, given the repeated dissemination of false or misleading information, the fact that they concerned the most central aspect of the company’s business, and the fact that the AMF’s Deputy Secretary General had already drawn the company’s attention in 2016 to the quality of its financial communications and, in particular, its presentation of liquidity risk.[16]

The Committee also noted that, although no losses suffered by third parties had been estimated, Rallye’s breaches were likely to have caused significant harm to investors, who were unable to assess and anticipate Rallye’s risk of default.[17]

Related content

Press review
27 October 2023
Press review – Week of 23 October 2023
This week, the press review looks back at the seizure of almost 60 million euros by French judicial authorities in...
Press review
Press review
29 September 2023
Press review – Week of 25 September 2023
This week, let's look back at the French Constitutional Council decision repealing an article of the French Criminal Procedure Code...
16 August 2023
France mulls privilege protections for in-house legal advice
French lawyers said the proposed legislation would give French companies greater protections from evidence-gathering requests sent by foreign regulators.
Focus on the French financial markets authority activity (AMF)
13 July 2023
[Infography] Focus on the French financial markets authority activity (AMF)
The French Financial Markets Authority (“AMF”) intensive enforcement activity again demonstrates the regulator’s ambition to continuously strengthen market surveillance, through...
13 July 2023
[Infographie] Focus on the French data protection authority activity (CNIL)
Over the past months, the French Commission Nationale de l’Informatique et des Libertés (“CNIL”), regulator of personal data, imposed tremendous...
La 32e chambre correctionnelle du tribunal judiciaire de Paris se prononce pour la première fois en matière de délit de manipulation de marché
7 July 2023
The Paris Criminal Court issues its first decision on a market manipulation case
On 25 May 2023, the Paris Criminal Court (32nd Chamber) ruled for the first time on the offence of market...
Press review
Press review
9 June 2023
Press review – Week of 5 June 2023
This week's press review details the suspicions of favoritism hanging over Olivier Dussopt, Minister of Labor, Employment and Integration, and...
Press review
Press review
2 June 2023
Press review – Week of 29 May 2023
This week, the 32nd chamber of the Paris judicial court handed down its first conviction for price manipulation against Thierry...
DPA ABA 2023
26 April 2023
Deferred Prosecution Agreements and how much do they shield from litigation and arbitration?
During the American Bar Association International Law Section 2023 conference, Stéphane de Navacelle will discuss Corporate criminal liability frameworks which...
9 March 2023
Historical sanctions by the Financial Markets Authority
The Financial Markets Authority’s Enforcement Committee imposes record-breaking fines on a British asset management company and two of its executives...
24 January 2023
Sanctioning obstructions to AMF investigations: Update from the Constitutional Court in its decision of 28 January 2022
On 28 January 2022, the Constitutional Court ruled that Article L. 621-15, II, f of the Monetary and Financial Code...
Press review
Week of 21 November 2022
25 November 2022
Press review – Week of 21 November 2022
In this press review, you will discover the opening of a preliminary investigation by the French National Financial Prosecutor’s Office...