+ Follow DOMINGO VILLAFRANCA AND NOMER DEL MUNDO Tag
Array
(
[results] => Array
(
[0] => Array
(
[ArticleID] => 298298
[Title] => SEC clears SM Investments
[Summary] => The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has cleared SM Investments Corp. (SMIC) from allegations it failed to disclose material information in violation of the Securities Regulation Code.
This as the commission en banc upheld the recommendation by the Corporation Finance Department which cleared SMIC from charges it violated the SRC for not disclosing a court case involving a property owned by its 93 percent-owned subsidiary Manila Southcoast Development Corp. (MSDC), in its registration statement.
[DatePublished] => 2005-09-24 00:00:00
[ColumnID] => 133272
[Focus] => 0
[AuthorID] => 1804021
[AuthorName] => Zinnia B. Dela Peña
[SectionName] => Business
[SectionUrl] => business
[URL] =>
)
[1] => Array
(
[ArticleID] => 298135
[Title] => SEC set to absolve SM Investments from charges of disclosure violation
[Summary] => SM Investments Corp. (SMIC), the listed investment holding company of retail magnate Henry Sy, may be absolved from charges it breached disclosure rules with respect to a court case involving a property owned by its 93 percent-owned subsidiary Manila Southcoast Development Corp. (MSDC).
[DatePublished] => 2005-09-23 00:00:00
[ColumnID] => 133272
[Focus] => 0
[AuthorID] => 1804021
[AuthorName] => Zinnia B. Dela Peña
[SectionName] => Business
[SectionUrl] => business
[URL] =>
)
[2] => Array
(
[ArticleID] => 285539
[Title] => SM Investments faces SEC sanctions over disclosure violations
[Summary] => SM Investments Corp. (SMIC)., the listed investment holding company of retail tycoon Henry Sy, faces possible sanctions from the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which include the revocation of its registration statement and the imposition of administrative fines, for alleged violation of the agency’s disclosure rules.
An SEC official said an investigation conducted by an SEC unit showed that SMIC failed to disclose a court case involving a property owned by its 93 percent-owned subsidiary Manila Southcoast Development Corp. (MSDC).
[DatePublished] => 2005-07-08 00:00:00
[ColumnID] => 133272
[Focus] => 0
[AuthorID] => 1804021
[AuthorName] => Zinnia B. Dela Peña
[SectionName] => Business
[SectionUrl] => business
[URL] =>
)
[3] => Array
(
[ArticleID] => 274985
[Title] => SM Investments could get off the hook in non-disclosure case — SEC official
[Summary] => The complaint against SM Investments Corp. (SMIC) over the alleged non-disclosure of a court case involving its subsidiary may not hold water the said case was dismissed prior to SMIC’s filing of a registration statement or prospectus with the Securities and Exchange Commission, an SEC official said.
SMIC claimed that the cases involving its 93 percent-owned unit Manila Southcoast Development Corp.’s property in Batangas had already been dismissed by the regional trial court. The company, however, did not say when it was dismissed.
[DatePublished] => 2005-04-23 00:00:00
[ColumnID] => 133272
[Focus] => 0
[AuthorID] => 1804021
[AuthorName] => Zinnia B. Dela Peña
[SectionName] => Business
[SectionUrl] => business
[URL] =>
)
)
)
DOMINGO VILLAFRANCA AND NOMER DEL MUNDO
Array
(
[results] => Array
(
[0] => Array
(
[ArticleID] => 298298
[Title] => SEC clears SM Investments
[Summary] => The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has cleared SM Investments Corp. (SMIC) from allegations it failed to disclose material information in violation of the Securities Regulation Code.
This as the commission en banc upheld the recommendation by the Corporation Finance Department which cleared SMIC from charges it violated the SRC for not disclosing a court case involving a property owned by its 93 percent-owned subsidiary Manila Southcoast Development Corp. (MSDC), in its registration statement.
[DatePublished] => 2005-09-24 00:00:00
[ColumnID] => 133272
[Focus] => 0
[AuthorID] => 1804021
[AuthorName] => Zinnia B. Dela Peña
[SectionName] => Business
[SectionUrl] => business
[URL] =>
)
[1] => Array
(
[ArticleID] => 298135
[Title] => SEC set to absolve SM Investments from charges of disclosure violation
[Summary] => SM Investments Corp. (SMIC), the listed investment holding company of retail magnate Henry Sy, may be absolved from charges it breached disclosure rules with respect to a court case involving a property owned by its 93 percent-owned subsidiary Manila Southcoast Development Corp. (MSDC).
[DatePublished] => 2005-09-23 00:00:00
[ColumnID] => 133272
[Focus] => 0
[AuthorID] => 1804021
[AuthorName] => Zinnia B. Dela Peña
[SectionName] => Business
[SectionUrl] => business
[URL] =>
)
[2] => Array
(
[ArticleID] => 285539
[Title] => SM Investments faces SEC sanctions over disclosure violations
[Summary] => SM Investments Corp. (SMIC)., the listed investment holding company of retail tycoon Henry Sy, faces possible sanctions from the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which include the revocation of its registration statement and the imposition of administrative fines, for alleged violation of the agency’s disclosure rules.
An SEC official said an investigation conducted by an SEC unit showed that SMIC failed to disclose a court case involving a property owned by its 93 percent-owned subsidiary Manila Southcoast Development Corp. (MSDC).
[DatePublished] => 2005-07-08 00:00:00
[ColumnID] => 133272
[Focus] => 0
[AuthorID] => 1804021
[AuthorName] => Zinnia B. Dela Peña
[SectionName] => Business
[SectionUrl] => business
[URL] =>
)
[3] => Array
(
[ArticleID] => 274985
[Title] => SM Investments could get off the hook in non-disclosure case — SEC official
[Summary] => The complaint against SM Investments Corp. (SMIC) over the alleged non-disclosure of a court case involving its subsidiary may not hold water the said case was dismissed prior to SMIC’s filing of a registration statement or prospectus with the Securities and Exchange Commission, an SEC official said.
SMIC claimed that the cases involving its 93 percent-owned unit Manila Southcoast Development Corp.’s property in Batangas had already been dismissed by the regional trial court. The company, however, did not say when it was dismissed.
[DatePublished] => 2005-04-23 00:00:00
[ColumnID] => 133272
[Focus] => 0
[AuthorID] => 1804021
[AuthorName] => Zinnia B. Dela Peña
[SectionName] => Business
[SectionUrl] => business
[URL] =>
)
)
)
abtest
