header-logo header-logo

MAD for it?

08 November 2007 / Toby Starr
Issue: 7296 / Categories: Features , Banking , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Are lawyers to blame for the Northern Rock fiasco?
Toby Starr reports

The Market Abuse Directive 2003/6/EC, shortened to MAD by those who dislike legislation against insider trading, was intended to ensure that quoted firms were transparent with their investors and the market.
As was widely reported, on 20 September 2007 the governor of the Bank of England, Mervyn King, blamed MAD for preventing the bank from stepping in to help Northern Rock when he told the House of Commons Treasury Committee that “we were unable to carry out a lender-of-last-resort operation in the way we would have done in the 1990s, as a result of the Market Abuse Directive”. This was, said King, a major reason why the bank was unable to avert “the run on the Rock”.

During September, alongside the pictures of queuing savers, a public wrangle developed over the legal advice King had taken. The European Commission said that King’s advice was wrong and that there was sufficient “flexibility” in MAD for Northern Rock to keep information out of the public domain relating to Bank of England financial support during

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll