Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013

Enforcement, liability, and appeals - FMA's enforcement powers - Unsolicited offer orders

472: When FMA may make unsolicited offer orders

You could also call this:

"When can the FMA stop someone breaking the rules about making unsolicited offers?"

Illustration for Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013

The FMA can make an unsolicited offer order if they think someone has broken, is breaking, or will break an unsolicited offer rule. You can break this rule in the past, now, or in the future, and the FMA can still make an order. The FMA can make this order even if you have not broken the rule before or if breaking the rule will not cause harm right away.

The FMA looks at what you are doing or might do to decide if they should make an order. They can make an order if they think you will break an unsolicited offer rule, no matter what you have done before. You can find more information about this rule by looking at the link to related legislation.

This text is automatically generated. It might be out of date or be missing some parts. Find out more about how we do this.

This page was last updated on

View the original legislation for this page at https://legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1986/0120/latest/link.aspx?id=DLM4091684.


Previous

471: FMA may order that offer may not be made under recognition regime, or

"The FMA can ban you from making certain offers if you broke the rules badly."


Next

473: Terms of unsolicited offer orders, or

"Rules for dealing with unexpected investment offers"

Part 8Enforcement, liability, and appeals
FMA's enforcement powers: Unsolicited offer orders

472When FMA may make unsolicited offer orders

  1. The FMA may make an unsolicited offer order if the FMA is satisfied that a person has acted, is acting, or is likely to act in contravention of an unsolicited offer provision.

  2. If the FMA is satisfied that an unsolicited offer provision is likely to be contravened by a person (A) in the future, the FMA may make an unsolicited offer order—

  3. whether or not A has previously contravened the provision; and
    1. whether or not there is an imminent danger of substantial damage to any person if the provision is contravened.
      Compare