IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/eucflr/v18y2021i1p2-33n1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Some Reflections on the Self-insider and the Market Abuse Regulation – The Self-insider as a Monopoly-Square Insider

Author

Listed:
  • Lombardo Stefano

    (Associate Professor of Economic Law, Faculty of Economics and Management, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, BolzanoItaly; ECGI Research Member; CRELE (Center for Research in Law and Economics, UNIBZ) Research Associate. A very preliminary version of this article was presented at the Insider Trading Conference organized at the Faculty of Economics and Management of the Free University of Bozen-Bolzano on October 25–26, 2019.)

Abstract

This article deals with the self-insider, i. e. the possible creation of the inside information by a person and its (abusive) exploitation. It describes the situation in Germany and in Italy and provides a taxonomy of the several cases of self-insider. The article then analyzes the case law of the ECJ and the MAR regulatory provisions for justifying/neglecting the existence of the self-insider (Article 9.5 and 9.6 MAR). Given the unclear regulatory answer regarding its sanctionability, the article proposes, based on the economics of MAR, a law and economics reason of why the self-insider sometime should be sanctioned, by describing it as a peculiar monopolistic behavior able to distort investors’ confidence and market integrity. Finally, the article suggests that the European legislator should explicitly deal with the problem.

Suggested Citation

  • Lombardo Stefano, 2021. "Some Reflections on the Self-insider and the Market Abuse Regulation – The Self-insider as a Monopoly-Square Insider," European Company and Financial Law Review, De Gruyter, vol. 18(1), pages 2-33, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:eucflr:v:18:y:2021:i:1:p:2-33:n:1
    DOI: 10.1515/ecfr-2021-0004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/ecfr-2021-0004
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/ecfr-2021-0004?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:bpj:eucflr:v:18:y:2021:i:1:p:2-33:n:1. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    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.