Is Spoofing,Price Capping, Etc Legitimate Trading Strategies Lurk & Learns:
100% SPECULATION:
Again, I preface my post to my Lurk & Learns wrt (IMHO) the APPEARANCE of external forces conspiring to price contain TXP shares, ostensibly for a potential HTO (hostile take under).
While, those working against a junior on it's was to becoming a POSSIBLE mid-cap, as some form of production substitution or simply "all in a days work" for (say) a hedge fund who might then pruportedly sell the purloined assets to the "highest bidder".
We can only surmise that the purloiners are well positioned to "do what they do best". Today's "rant" presents one (push back) option to a management quietly working away towards a payback (aka a whipsaw) that is predicated on RESULTS. Predicated on proven SCIENCE....."repeatability being the key to accuracy".
While a Trini comedian (John Agitation) might characterize the Royston-1 discovery, as PB "passed gas twice" on his way to 10,500 TD and 35API light oil discovery.
For those (Trini challanged) who dont "ketch" the joke.... recall PB's timeline for the two(2) tests of significance above the light oil zone in FUBR rocks. Point being, let's see if both zones of said gas are/is in quantities (or not) running the spectrum from, "enough to light a Bunson Burner or to the delight of the macoutious Satellite watcher(s) and light up the night sky from Princess Town, Point Fortin and.....all the way to Point Lisas.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Law Society's Seizure of Files Justified, Court Rules
2021-11-22 21:48 ET - Street Wire
by Mike Caswell
The Court of Appeal for British Columbia has upheld a search conducted at the office of a Vancouver securities lawyer accused of having links to market manipulations in the United States. That lawyer, who remains unidentified, had protested the search as one that violated the "sacrosanct nature" of solicitor-client privilege. He also complained that it was overly broad.
The ruling comes as part of an investigation that the Law Society has been conducting for at least two years. So far, only the barest details of the matter are available. The court file is sealed and the lawyer is only referred to as "A Lawyer." (Stockwatch determined, however, that the lawyer and his firm represented scores of companies listed in the United States over 10 years or more. The lawyer is the principal of a firm with six employees.)
The court battle stems from a search of the lawyer's office that the Law Society undertook on Oct. 7, 2019. During a compliance audit that year, the Law Society found something of interest. It is not clear what that something was, but it was concerning enough that the regulator began looking at the lawyer's entire practice. The investigation culminated with the disputed search, in which the regulator seized all of the firm's hard drives, electronic files, accounting records and phones.
The lawyer has since been contesting the search through the courts. Among other things, he complained that the search of his office was overly broad and said that the seizure of his firm's records was unreasonable in the circumstances. As he saw things, the Law Society was only allowed to investigate the specific violation that it believed him to have committed, and was not allowed to examine his entire practice.
The problem, at least for the lawyer, is that every judge to review the case so far has disagreed with him. The matter initially went before B.C. Supreme Court Justice Andrew Majawa, who ruled on May 14, 2021, that the Law Society may conduct broad investigations such as that against the lawyer. The society only needs to hold a reasonable belief that there were violations.
The lawyer, apparently not satisfied with that outcome, took the matter to the Court of Appeal. In a unanimous ruling released on Nov. 18, 2021, three judges there have also rejected his complaints. They have agreed that the proper scope of the Law Society's investigation is the entirety of the lawyer's practice.
The powers of the Law Society are not unreasonable, given its important duty in protecting the public, the judges found. The judges also agreed that the Law Society has safeguards against overly intrusive investigations. Among other things, an investigative order requires authorization of the chair of the discipline committee, and can only be initiated if there is a "reasonable belief" that a lawyer has committed a violation. There are also procedures in place that protect the privacy of the lawyer and the confidentiality of his documents.
The appeal decision follows a one-day hearing held on Oct. 13, 2021. The matter featured a large contingent of lawyers, with the Law Society being represented by J. Kenneth McEwan, Emily Kirkpatrick and Saheli Sodhi. The lawyer was represented by Carey Veinotte, Savannah Hamilton and Rajit Mittal.
While much legal ink has been spilled over the Law Society's search, there is little so far to state what exactly the regulator is investigating. A letter quoted in the original judge's ruling did provide some hints though. It stated that the lawyer "may have allowed clients to use [his] trust accounts for the flow of funds in the absence of substantial legal services related to those funds and/or in the absence of making reasonable inquiries." On top of that, "there are concerns arising from your having acted for or engaged with entities and individuals who were apparently involved in market manipulations as determined by the [U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission]."
The quoted portion of the letter did not mention any specific stocks or clients. That information will only become public if and when the Law Society issues a formal notice of allegations.
© 2021 Canjex Publishing Ltd. All rights reserved.
GLTAL - GLAP - Caveat Emptor - Patience....
Cheers
Stanley