スペインの最高裁判所は、銀行が詐欺てきに販売した優先株式の顧客プロファイルを評価するべきであると述べている、詐欺てき販売の犯罪を認める
The Supreme Court stated that the bank should assess the preferred customer profile
El Supremo afirma que la banca debió evaluar el perfil del cliente en preferentes
El Alto Tribunal condena al BBVA a indemnizar a un matrimonio por el dinero invertido
Novagalicia condenada a devolver 550.000 euros de preferentes
Agencias 31 MAY 2013 - 15:18 CET
The Supreme Court stated that the bank should assess the preferred customer profile
The High Court condemns the BBVA to compensate a marriage for the money
Novagalicia ordered to return € 550,000 preferred
Agencies 31 MAY 2013 - 15:18 CET
The Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court has sentenced BBVA to compensate with 291 488 euros plus interest at a marriage of the damages caused them to purchase preferred shares of Lehman Brothers, an operation in which the bank acted as manager . The argument offered by the High Court is that it was the bank's responsibility to evaluate the profile of customers and sell products suitable to it.
Prosecuted Facts are based on the application filed by a marriage against BBVA claim for damages caused by the negligent actions of the bank to acquire preferred shares of Lehman Brothers entity under a management contract discretionary investment portfolios .
The claim was upheld at first instance by the judge considered that there was a negligent fulfillment of the contract to be purchased a product unadjusted customer profile. The Provincial Court of Valencia reversed this decision, considering the use of the bank, on the ground that it had provided adequate information to understand the product purchased and because industry regulations did not prevent conservative customers order products risk.
moreThe Court cautions against collapse if preferred petsThe CNMV calls for more powers of inspection and interventionNovagalicia, ordered to repay 550,000 euros
The court's decision, released Friday, has estimated the appeal of the bank's customers. The judges have concluded that the indications on the client's risk profile and investment preferences play "an integrative function of the content of the contract", being a legal obligation to these companies collect information to their customers about their financial situation, investment experience and investment objectives and inform in a clear and transparent about the risks of the contracts traded, so that poor information can be a determining negligence compensation for damages.
In the case of marriage, the Supreme believes that full and clear this information had not been provided or had acted in good faith, to be a contradiction between the client's risk profile, which was very low, and the chosen values of high risk, which, with an acting diligently and in good faith, would have required that it becomes apparent inconsistency between the chosen profile and investment products accepted to ensure that the information was clear and had been understood.
0 件のコメント:
コメントを投稿