IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/reggov/v16y2022i4p1265-1282.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Challenging the regulators: Enforcement and appeals in financial regulation

Author

Listed:
  • Roy Gava

Abstract

This article investigates the conditions under which regulatees challenge regulatory sanctions in court. Targets of enforcement have the right to make independent regulatory agencies (IRAs) accountable in court, but IRAs would prefer not to have their enforcement actions challenged. This article argues that, when deciding whether to contest regulators through appeals, regulatees consider the price of harming the regulatory relationship. Regulatory litigation is expected to be shaped by the type of enforcement measures at stake, the type of entity (i.e., firm or individual), and the kind of relation between firms and authorities (i.e., primary regulators). The empirical analysis relies on more than 3,700 cases from 18 financial regulators covering 13 European countries between 2004 and 2020. Results suggest that enforcement actions that impose costlier sanctions and target individuals are at higher risk of appeal; in contrast, firms sanctioned by their national primary regulators show less appetite for appeals.

Suggested Citation

  • Roy Gava, 2022. "Challenging the regulators: Enforcement and appeals in financial regulation," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(4), pages 1265-1282, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:reggov:v:16:y:2022:i:4:p:1265-1282
    DOI: 10.1111/rego.12405
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12405
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/rego.12405?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Söderberg, Magnus & Menezes, Flavio M. & Santolino, Miguel, 2018. "Regulatory behaviour under threat of court reversal: Theory and evidence from the Swedish electricity market," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 302-310.
    2. Zheying Wu & Robert Salomon, 2017. "Deconstructing the liability of foreignness: Regulatory enforcement actions against foreign banks," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 48(7), pages 837-861, September.
    3. Coffee, John C., Jr., 2007. "Law and the Market: The Impact of Enforcement," Working Papers 07-3, University of Pennsylvania, Wharton School, Weiss Center.
    4. Jonathan M. Karpoff & D. Scott Lee & Gerald S. Martin, 2014. "The Consequences to Managers for Financial Misrepresentation," Springer Books, in: Roberto Pietra & Stuart McLeay & Joshua Ronen (ed.), Accounting and Regulation, edition 127, chapter 0, pages 339-375, Springer.
    5. Koop, Christel, 2011. "Explaining the Accountability of Independent Agencies: The Importance of Political Salience," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 31(2), pages 209-234, August.
    6. Shavell, Steven, 1995. "The Appeals Process as a Means of Error Correction," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 24(2), pages 379-426, June.
    7. Jacint Jordana & Xavier Fernández‐i‐Marín & Andrea C. Bianculli, 2018. "Agency proliferation and the globalization of the regulatory state: Introducing a data set on the institutional features of regulatory agencies," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(4), pages 524-540, December.
    8. Giandomenico Majone, 2001. "Nonmajoritarian Institutions and the Limits of Democratic Governance: A Political Transaction-Cost Approach," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 157(1), pages 57-78, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Schantl, Stefan F. & Wagenhofer, Alfred, 2020. "Deterrence of financial misreporting when public and private enforcement strategically interact," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1).
    2. Voigt, Stefan, 2023. "Non-Majoritarian Institutions - A Menace to Constitutional Democracy?," ILE Working Paper Series 68, University of Hamburg, Institute of Law and Economics.
    3. Xu, Wenming & Xu, Guangdong, 2020. "Understanding public enforcement of securities law in China: An empirical analysis of the enforcement actions of the CSRC and its regional offices against informational misconduct," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    4. Ormazabal, Gaizka & Duro, Miguel & Heese, Jonas, 2017. "Does the Public Disclosure of the SEC’s Oversight Actions Matter?," CEPR Discussion Papers 12145, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    5. González, Camilo Ignacio, 2022. "Can we have it all? The evolution of regulatory frameworks in Latin America," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    6. William T. Allen & Han Shen, 2011. "Assessing China's Top-Down Securities Markets," NBER Working Papers 16713, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Douglas Cumming & Lars Hornuf & Moein Karami & Denis Schweizer, 2023. "Disentangling Crowdfunding from Fraudfunding," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 182(4), pages 1103-1128, February.
    8. Abdul‐Rahman Khokhar & Hesam Shahriari, 2022. "Is the SEC captured? Evidence from political connectedness and SEC enforcement actions," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(2), pages 2725-2756, June.
    9. Cumming, Douglas & Dannhauser, Robert & Johan, Sofia, 2015. "Financial market misconduct and agency conflicts: A synthesis and future directions," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 150-168.
    10. Tanja Artiga González & Markus Schmid & David Yermack, 2019. "Does Price Fixing Benefit Corporate Managers?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(10), pages 4813-4840, October.
    11. Aspasia Tsaoussi & Eleni Zervogianni, 2010. "Judges as satisficers: a law and economics perspective on judicial liability," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 29(3), pages 333-357, June.
    12. Badolato, Patrick G. & Donelson, Dain C. & Ege, Matthew, 2014. "Audit committee financial expertise and earnings management: The role of status," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 208-230.
    13. Arena, Matteo P. & Ferris, Stephen P., 2018. "A global analysis of corporate litigation risk and costs," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 28-41.
    14. Humphery-Jenner, M., 2011. "Internal and External Discipline Following Securities Class Actions," Discussion Paper 2011-044, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    15. Sapovadia, Vrajlal & Madhani, Pankaj, 2015. "Corporate Governance and Disclosure Practices in India: MNC Subsidiaries versus Domestic Cross-Listed Firms," MPRA Paper 96043, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Leonardo Felli & Alessandro Riboni & Luca Anderlini, 2007. "Statute Law or Case Law?," 2007 Meeting Papers 952, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    17. Lamotte, Olivier & Chalençon, Ludivine & Mayrhofer, Ulrike & Colovic, Ana, 2021. "Intangible resources and cross-border acquisition decisions: The impact of reputation and the moderating effect of experiential knowledge," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 297-310.
    18. Tatiana Kostova & Sjoerd Beugelsdijk, 2021. "Integrating Diversity into Distance Research for Added Rigor, Parsimony, and Relevance," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(6), pages 1669-1689, September.
    19. Marco Pagano & Giovanni Immordino, 2012. "Corporate Fraud, Governance, and Auditing," Review of Corporate Finance Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 109-133.
    20. Ratha, Dilip & De, Supriyo & Kurlat, Sergio, 2018. "Does governing law affect bond spreads?," Emerging Markets Review, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 60-78.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:reggov:v:16:y:2022:i:4:p:1265-1282. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1748-5991 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.