British Biotech censured by LSE
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.THE LONDON Stock Exchange yesterday censured British Biotech after completing a 15-month investigation which concluded the company had violated Exchange rules.
The LSE said British Biotech had failed to disclose information which could impact its business and move its shareprice between June 1997 and February 1998, after the European Medicines Evaluation Agency's rejected an initial marketing application for Zacutex, British Biotech's pancreatic drug. The LSE also said directors and some employees were allowed to deal in the company's shares whilst it possessed the unpublished information.
The LSE's said it took "a most serious view" of the company's failure and did not accept the company's claim it had broken no rules because directors believed Zacutex would be approved in the end.
A spokeswoman for British Biotech said yesterday it did not agree with the findings but would not appeal. Directors implicated in the judgment had never believed they possessed information to change their expectations for Zacutex, she said. "The Exchange has come to a different view, based on hindsight."
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments