Header graphic for print
Canadian Securities Regulatory Monitor News and Insight

Category Archives: Uncategorized

Subscribe to Uncategorized RSS Feed

TSX Releases Guidance with respect to Majority Voting Policies and Advance Notice Policies

Posted in Continuous and Timely Disclosure, Industry News, Uncategorized

On March 9, 2017, Toronto Stock Exchange issued Staff Notice 2017‑001 (the “Notice”), which provides guidance with respect to the TSX’s majority voting requirements for the election of directors (“Majority Voting Requirements”) and the use of advance notice policies and by-laws.

This guidance will be noteworthy for TSX‑listed companies whose majority voting policy and/or advance notice policy or by‑law has not yet been subject to review by the TSX. Such companies should assess their majority voting policy and any advance notice policy or by-law against the guidance in the Notice as soon as possible so that … Continue Reading

Overview of IOSCO Research Report on Financial Technologies (Fintech)

Posted in Uncategorized

Recently, the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) released its Research Report on Financial Technologies (Fintech). IOSCO is an international body comprised of the world’s securities regulators including some Canadian securities commissions. Fintech is disintermediating and re-intermediating securities businesses. The Report studies the evolution of Fintech and its intersection with securities market regulation in the categories described below.

Alternative Financing Platforms

The Report examines peer-to-peer lending (P2P lending) and equity crowdfunding (ECF), noting that the significant growth of each is attributable to a series of supply and demand factors, including the current low-interest rate environment, which has driven investors … Continue Reading

2016 CSA Continuous Disclosure Review: Mistakes to Avoid and Drafting Tips

Posted in Continuous and Timely Disclosure, Uncategorized

On July 18, 2016, the Canadian Securities Administrators (CSA) published a summary of the results of their annual continuous disclosure (CD) review of reporting issuers for fiscal year 2016. See CSA Staff Notice 51-346 – Continuous Disclosure Review Program Activities for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2016 (Staff Notice).


The CSA annually conducts both “full reviews” and “issue-oriented reviews” to identify material deficiencies in reporting issuers’ CD records. This year, a total of 902 CD reviews were conducted (down from 1,058 in fiscal 2015), with full reviews comprising 31% of the total reviews and issue-oriented reviews comprising 69%.… Continue Reading

IIROC Announces Dealer Sweep on Compensation-Related Conflicts

Posted in Broker-Dealers, Compliance and Supervision, CSA, IIROC, Industry News, Marketplaces, Registrants, Uncategorized

On April 6, IIROC published Notice 16-0068 – Managing Conflicts in the Best Interest of the Client (the 2016 IIROC Notice). IIROC intends to strengthen compliance by Dealer Members (DMs) with IIROC’s conflicts of interest rules, with a particular focus on the management of compensation-related conflicts.

Specifically, IIROC announced that it will take the following actions:

  1. Immediately enhance its compliance test procedures to more closely examine compensation grids, supervisory oversight of advisors recommending products with high commissions, and the monitoring of advisors approaching compensation thresholds;
  2. By June 2016, conduct a comprehensive survey to gather more detailed information
Continue Reading

Why Securities Regulators Can’t Collect Monetary Sanctions, and What They Plan To Do About It

Posted in AMF, CSA, Enforcement, IIROC, Litigation, OSC, Uncategorized

Securities regulators across Canada impose significant monetary sanctions against market participants each year. The CSA recently reported that provincial securities regulators collectively imposed $138.3 million in fines and administrative penalties and $111.7 million in restitution, compensation and disgorgement orders in 2015.[1] This was an increase of 102% from the previous year and the highest amount of monetary sanctions imposed since 2009.

At the same time that regulators are imposing increasing monetary sanctions, they are facing an increasing inability to actually collect these sanctions. For example, the British Columbia Securities Commission has collected less than 5% of monetary sanctions imposed … Continue Reading

OSC Proposes Higher Financial Awards for Whistleblowers

Posted in Amendments, Compliance and Supervision, Enforcement, Industry News, OSC, Proposals, Registrants, Requests for Comment, SEC, Uncategorized

The OSC is close to adopting a proposed final version of its previously-announced whistleblowing policy (the Program). The Program would award eligible whistleblowers up to $5 million for reporting serious securities- or derivatives-related misconduct that leads to significant enforcement or settlement outcomes.

We summarized the original OSC consultation paper in a previous article. The OSC received comments on the consultation paper and also hosted a stakeholder roundtable on the proposals. Reporting issuers will want to re-examine their internal compliance and reporting systems, codes of conduct and employment agreements in light of the proposed program. Key features are summarized … Continue Reading

BCSC dismisses insider trading and tipping allegations despite not condoning a respondent’s conduct

Posted in Uncategorized

In the recent Re Lum[1] decision, the British Columbia Securities Commission (BCSC) dismissed insider trader and tipping allegations against an investment analyst and his sister because the trading occurred on the basis of information that already had been generally disclosed. In the circumstances, the tipping that occurred, though not endorsed by the BCSC, was not found to warrant the imposition of a public interest penalty. The Panel’s approach to the public interest point is consistent with other decisions in BC and Ontario where a public interest penalty is denied after an underlying insider trading case has failed.

Summary of Continue Reading

Ce qu’implique un règlement – 2ème partie

Posted in Compliance and Supervision, Conformité et supervision, Enforcement, IIROC, Litige en valeurs mobilières, OCRCVM, Securities Litigation, Uncategorized

Vous êtes aux prises avec une plainte disciplinaire d’un organisme d’autoréglementation, plus particulièrement l’Organisme canadien de règlementation du commerce des valeurs mobilières (OCRCVM). Vous êtes à regarder vos options dont, entre autres, celle de procéder à un règlement avec l’OCRCVM.

Lors d’un premier article nous avons traité du processus de fonctionnement du règlement. Nous avons également vu qu’il n’était pas possible de régler une faute ou un manquement.

Alors quel est l’avantage d’une entente de règlement?

L’avantage du règlement est d’abord d’éviter la tenue d’une audition devant une formation d’instruction, laquelle déterminera dans un premier temps s’il y a culpabilité … Continue Reading

Ce qu’implique un réglement

Posted in Compliance and Supervision, Conformité et supervision, Enforcement, IIROC, Litige en valeurs mobilières, OCRCVM, Securities Litigation, Uncategorized

Vous êtes aux prises avec une plainte disciplinaire d’un organisme d’autoréglementation (« OAR »), plus particulièrement de l’Organisme canadien de réglementation du commerce des valeurs mobilières (« OCRCVM »). Vous êtes à regarder vos options dont, entre autres, celle de procéder à un règlement avec l’OCRCVM, de ladite plainte disciplinaire, cela soulève plusieurs questions :

  • Comment fonctionne le processus de règlement?
  • Peut-on régler sans reconnaître de faute?
  • Peut-on régler de façon confidentielle?

Dans ce premier article, nous allons répondre à ces trois questions. Dans un article subséquent, nous répondrons à d’autres questions qui peuvent être soulevées dans le cadre d’un … Continue Reading