 | ||
|
| Home Annual/Quarterly Updates About Us
|
UBS AG Summary: According to the law firm press release, the complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding UBS’s disclosure controls, procedures and internal controls over financial reporting, stating that these controls and procedures were effective when, in fact, they were not. This became apparent on September 15, 2011, when UBS disclosed that a supposed rogue trader, Kweku Adoboli (“Adoboli”), had engaged in unauthorized trades on behalf of UBS that resulted in losses of $2.3 billion. As a result of this disclosure, the price of UBS stock dropped over 10% in a single day. Subsequently, defendants stated in an SEC filing that “we have determined that certain controls designed to prevent or detect the use of unauthorized and fictitious transactions on a timely basis were not operating effectively” and “our previous evaluation stating that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective on 31 December 2010 . . . should no longer be relied upon.”
On January 30, 2012, The Wall Street Journal reported that British and Swiss regulators were likely to begin enforcement proceedings against UBS for the gaps in oversight that had allowed Adoboli to make the trades at issue. On that same day, Adoboli pleaded not guilty to criminal charges in London.
On October 1, 2012, a Consolidated Complaint for Violations of the Federal Securities Laws was filed by the plaintiffs.
On March 04, 2013, an Amended Consolidated Complaint for Violations of the Federal Securities Laws was filed by the plaintiffs.
INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 6021
Sector: Financial
Industry: Investment Services
| COMPANY/ISSUER NAME: | UBS AG |
| COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER: | UBS |
| COMPANY WEBSITE: | http://www.ubs.com |
| FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE | |||||||||||||||||
| C.D.T.S. No. 1 and A.T.U. Local 1321 Pension Plan, et al. v. UBS AG, et al. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT | |||
| Complaint for Violation of The Federal Securities Laws | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 06/22/2012 | ||
| U.S. District Court Civil Docket | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 06/22/2012 | ||
| REFERENCE COMPLAINT | |||||||||||||||||
| C.D.T.S. No. 1 and A.T.U. Local 1321 Pension Plan, et al. v. UBS AG, et al. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT | |||
| Order | |||
| Type: Order | Date on the document: 08/30/2012 | ||
| Consolidated Complaint For Violations of the Federal Securities Laws | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 10/01/2012 | ||
| U.S. District Court Civil Docket | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 10/01/2012 | ||
| First Amended Consolidated: Complaint for Violations of the Federal Securities Laws | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 03/04/2013 | ||
| U.S. District Court Civil Docket | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 04/03/2013 | ||
| OTHER DOCUMENTS | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: | |||
| Type: | Date on the document: | ||
WARNING AND DISCLAIMER OF LIABILITY:
The information included on this Web site, whether provided by personnel employed by Stanford Law School or by third parties, is provided for research and teaching purposes only. Neither Stanford University, Stanford Law School, nor any of their employees, agents, contractors, or affiliates warrant the accuracy or completeness of the information or analyses displayed herein, and we caution all readers that inclusion of any information on this site does not constitute an endorsement of the truthfulness or accuracy of that information. In particular, this Web site contains complaints and other documents filed in federal and state courts, which make allegations that may or may not be accurate. No reader should, on the basis of information contained in or referenced by this Web site, assume that any of these allegations are truthful.
Go to Search page | Go to Case Index page | Back to Top