Blow to Ripple as a dish allows the SEC to continue to apply intimidation tactics.
Blow to Ripple as a dish allows the SEC to continue to apply intimidation tactics.
- A US judge decided in favor of the SEC so that the regulatory authority can continue to send agreements to foreign companies in order to collect further information in their case against Ripple.
- Ripple had argued that this was a intimidation tactic that the SEC used in order to win the upper hand, but in a rare victory for the supervisory authority the judge stood by.
Ripple has recently won many of the small battles in court against the US stock exchange supervisory authority because their defense continues to gain dynamics. In the last version, however, the SEC prevailed. A federal judge rejected Ripple's request to force the SEC no Memoranda of Understanding (Mous) to send more to foreign companies to collect information about the company.
As reported by Crypto News Flash, the SEC has contacted foreign companies to receive more information about the blockchain payment company. The SEC had sent MOU inquiries to supervisory authorities in other jurisdiction without communication to the court.
CEO Brad Garlinghouse and Chairman Chris Larsen moved to court a month ago to end this. They described the step as a intimidation tactic that Ripple should deter foreign partners. According to the two managers, the SEC not only sent the inquiries from the declaration of intent to foreign regulatory authorities, but also asked them to "judge stressful document inquiries to companies that are subject to the jurisdiction of the foreign regulatory authority".
This tactic has "a significant impact on the recipient of the inquiries, including Ripple's business partners in overseas, and represents an unjustified intimidation tactic," they told the court.
In your Decision, Netburn rejected her application.
judge allows "intimidation tactics"
Richter Netburn said that the SEC was in its right to request information from its foreign colleagues. This is not a new tactic that the regulator invents, and it has already applied it in other cases.
"The SEC is the signature of the multilateral memorandum of understanding and other bilateral agreements that promote the exchange of information between foreign nations," said the judge.
These agreements enable the SEC to request information from foreign security supervisory authorities that can reject the inquiries - which in this case has happened in response to some inquiries from the SEC - or they can agree to create the creation of documents of foreign companies within the framework of the jurisdiction of the foreign supervisory authority.
She further explained that they had taken into account all the arguments that Larsen and Garlinghouse had brought up. This includes the claim that the Sec has used intimidation tactics. However, she noted that “no evidence indicates that the SEC made its applications with evil.
she then decided:
Regardless of this, the Court of Justice comes to the conclusion that the use of the applications by the SEC is permitted and does not stand in the way of the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice.
Source: Crypto-news-flash.com
Kommentare (0)