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

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

Hamlins—Maddox Legal

Hamlins—Maddox Legal

London firm announces acquisition of corporate team

Ward Hadaway—Nik Tunley

Ward Hadaway—Nik Tunley

Head of corporate appointed following Teesside merger

Taylor Rose—Russell Jarvis

Taylor Rose—Russell Jarvis

Firm expands into banking and finance sector with newly appointed head of banking

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll