https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342339 Repeated large orders placed at prices materially away from the prevailing market price, together with coordinated trading and awareness of the impending client order, were treated as sufficient to indicate manipulative intent under the PFUTP framework. Direct evidence was not required; the regulator and tribunal could rely on the totality of circumstances to assess whether the trading pattern created a false market impression and artificial depth. A broker may be held responsible where its conduct facilitates clients' manipulative trades and falls short of the required standards of integrity, care, and diligence. The suspension order was upheld and the appeal was dismissed. en-us Wed, 08 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 02 May 2017 11:40:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342339 Repeated large orders placed at prices materially away from the prevailing market price, together with coordinated trading and awareness of the impending client order, were treated as sufficient to indicate manipulative intent under the PFUTP framework. Direct evidence was not required; the regulator and tribunal could rely on the totality of circumstances to assess whether the trading pattern created a false market impression and artificial depth. A broker may be held responsible where its conduct facilitates clients' manipulative trades and falls short of the required standards of integrity, care, and diligence. The suspension order was upheld and the appeal was dismissed. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 08 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342339