The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) recently issued a regulatory notice regarding the use of confidentiality provisions in settlement agreements.
It specifically reminds firms that FINRA Rule 2010 prohibits provisions that restrict or preclude a customer or any other person from communicating with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), FINRA, or any federal or state regulatory authority regarding a possible securities law violation.
According to the FINRA, its intent is not to preclude securities industry firms from entering into settlement agreements that include confidentiality provisions. Rather, it wants to ensure that agreements are written to expressly authorize, without restriction or condition, a customer or other person to initiate direct communications with, or to respond to, any inquiry from, FINRA or other regulatory authorities.
The notice provides the following example of an acceptable confidentiality provision in a settlement agreement:
Any non-disclosure provision in this agreement does not prohibit or restrict you (or your attorney) from initiating communications directly with, or responding to any inquiry from, or providing testimony before, the SEC, FINRA, any other self-regulatory organization or any other state or federal regulatory authority, regarding this settlement or its underlying facts or circumstances.
FINRA’s guidance also highlights that confidentiality provisions relating to document production in the FINRA arbitration discovery process do not apply to the sharing of the documents with regulatory authorities. Moreover, the use of confidentiality provisions in discovery stipulations that prohibit or restrict a customer’s or other person’s ability to communicate directly with or in response to an inquiry from a regulatory authority may also violate Rule 2010.
Given the increased scrutiny by FINRA and the SEC, financial firms should review the non-disclosure provisions of their confidentiality agreements to ensure compliance. The failure to do so could lead to a costly violation.
If you have any questions about this post or would like to discuss your settlement agreements, please contact me or the Scarinci Hollenbeck attorney with whom you work.
Rule 26 Expert Discovery: When an Expert Witness Uses AI, Is It Discoverable?
Case law following the 2010 amendments to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 offers guidance on how courts are likely to address whether an expert witness’s AI records are subject to discovery. Key Takeaways Rule 26 Expert Discovery After the 2010 Amendments This article addresses the question courts and lawyers have faced in recent cases: […]
“Show how 3M is 0% at fault.” The absurd tale of how a 350-page ChatGPT history for 3M’s expert witness was produced during a deposition is more likely than you think. It’s an inevitable trend, and an unsettled question for federal courts as experts make generative AI part of their workflow. Key Takeaways Expert Witness […]
The Screenshot Problem: Why Nothing Is Really Private Anymore
Screenshots have changed the risks of electronic communications. The screenshot problem is that messages intended for one person or a small group can be copied, forwarded, preserved, and ultimately presented to opposing counsel, regulators, journalists, customers, or a jury. Businesses should recognize that a truly private digital conversation is increasingly unreliable and ensure their policies, […]
BESS Project Agreements: Allocating Risk Among Developers, EPC Contractors, and Equipment Suppliers
Developers, engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) contractors, and equipment suppliers each play a critical role in completing a BESS project. However, when equipment costs rise, deliveries are delayed, or regulations change, determining who bears the financial consequences can become contentious. Well-drafted project agreements are essential to sound risk allocation. Key Takeaways This article is Part […]
IP Infringement: What Steps Can You Take If You're Affected?
IP infringement occurs when someone uses your intellectual property without your permission or beyond the scope of the permission you granted. Common examples of IP infringement include copying a product’s patented features or using a trademarked logo in a way that is likely to confuse consumers about the source or affiliation of goods or services. […]
Public Allegations, Unfinished Investigation: What New Jersey Businesses Should Do Next
When facing public allegations of wrongdoing, companies should not let the speed of the public conversation dictate the speed of an investigation. An investigation designed to confirm a preferred narrative rather than establish the facts can create serious problems later, particularly if litigation, regulatory scrutiny, or employment claims follow. Key Takeaways When public allegations surface […]
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court.
Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal
circumstances.
Sign up to get the latest from our attorneys!
Explore What Matters Most to You.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!
