The UK’s Financial Conduct Authority has brought fresh attention to a long-running market-abuse risk by charging two individuals with insider dealing after detecting suspicious trading tied to confidential takeover information.
According to StarCompliance, in the case, the regulator said an employee at Jefferies International allegedly passed inside information about a client transaction to a close associate, who then placed trades and made almost £70,000 in profit.
The alleged misconduct was uncovered after the FCA’s market-monitoring systems flagged activity that stood out on both timing and profit patterns, prompting further scrutiny that linked the two individuals through previous employment and personal connections.
For compliance teams, the message is straightforward: insider trading remains a serious threat, and supervisors are increasingly able to identify potential misconduct quickly—often before suspicious behaviour becomes widespread or difficult to unwind.
Firms looking to reduce exposure and demonstrate robust controls should start with accurate, real-time insider lists that clearly reflect who has access to sensitive information as deals progress, responsibilities shift, and new stakeholders are introduced.
They should also maintain strong information barriers to reduce the risk of material, nonpublic information (MNPI) moving across teams or business units, particularly where employees may sit close to both advisory activity and trading decisions.
Ongoing monitoring of employee trading activity remains essential across all asset classes, and policies should reflect the reality that potential market-abuse risk can surface beyond traditional equities—especially as firms expand into new instruments and digital assets.
Regular employee training should be treated as a control, not a formality, reinforcing what constitutes MNPI, when personal trading restrictions apply, and what the consequences are for individuals and firms if boundaries are ignored.
Clear escalation procedures matter just as much as detection, giving compliance teams defined steps to investigate concerns promptly, preserve evidence, document decisions, and report issues where required.
As regulators deploy increasingly sophisticated surveillance, manual processes can leave gaps—particularly when insider lists change frequently, data sits in silos, or investigations rely on incomplete records and time-consuming reconciliation.
That is why automation is becoming central to meeting expectations, helping firms detect unusual trading patterns earlier, connect behaviour to MNPI access, cut down errors in insider-list administration, and streamline investigations and recordkeeping.
Providers such as StarCompliance position their tools as a way to operationalise these controls through automated employee trading surveillance, MNPI and insider-list management, conflict identification with escalation workflows, and centralised reporting designed to be audit-ready.
Taken together, the FCA’s latest case underlines a broader direction of travel: market-abuse standards are rising, and firms that modernise insider-trading controls now are likely to be better placed to protect clients, reduce regulatory compliance risk, and maintain trust in markets facing growing scrutiny.
Copyright © 2026 RegTech Analyst
Copyright © 2018 RegTech Analyst
