Povzetek: V prispevku so skozi jezikovno, logično, sistematično in zgodovinsko razlago kazenske norme obravnavani nosilni elementi insiderskega delikta, vrednostno povezani s ciljem varstva zaupanja v finančne trge: predmet (notranja informacija), oseba (insider) in ravnanje (zloraba notranje informacije). V ponazoritev ključnih pravnih dilem uporabljam primere iz domače sodne in tožilske prakse ter vodilne judikate Sodišča EU. Ugotavljam, da nacionalni pravni režim sankcioniranja insiderskega delikta ni v celoti skladen z ustavnima načeloma enakosti in sorazmernosti ter ne izpolnjuje vseh minimalnih zahtev Direktive 2014/57. Nadalje opažam, da določeni deli definicije notranje informacije v pravu Unije zastirajo bistvo tega s tržnimi običaji povezanega pravnega standarda, katerega vsebinsko napolnitev bi bilo najustrezneje prepustiti sodiščem. V posamičnih zadevah iz pravosodne prakse se kažejo težave pri uporabi nekaterih temeljnih konceptov insiderskega delikta, kot so test razumnega vlagatelja, upoštevnost tržnih informacij, razlikovanje med objavo in javnostjo informacije, ločevanje med korporacijskopravnimi zavezami in tržnim pravom in podobno. K marsikateremu od teh problemov teorija ni prispevala poglobljene razprave.
Ključne besede: zloraba notranje informacije, insiderski delikt, poslovanje na podlagi notranjih informacij, notranja informacija, razkritje notranje informacije, zloraba trga, finančni instrumenti, trg finančnih instrumentov, Uredba o zlorabi trga 596/2014, Direktiva o zlorabi trga 2014/57, insider, kazensko pravo, zavarovana dobrina, blanketna norma, deskriptivni in normativni zakonski znaki, načelo enakosti, načelo določnosti, načelo sorazmernosti, skrbni pregled
Title: Insider Dealing in Criminal Code and Judicial Practice (Part 1)
Abstract: Employing grammatical, substantial, logical, systematic and historical interpretation of the penal provision, I address the main elements of the criminal offence of insider dealing: object (inside information), subject (insider), and conduct (abuse of inside information), bound together with the underlying purpose of protecting public confidence in financial markets. To illustrate the key legal dilemmas, I rely on case law produced by domestic courts and public prosecution office, as well as leading cases of the Court of Justice of the European Union. I note that the national legal sanctioning regime of insider trading offences does not fully comply with the constitutional principles of equality and proportionality, and does not meet all the minimum requirements of Directive 2014/57. I observe that in relation to the notion of inside information, Union law has started to rely on rules that obscure the essence of this purely legal standard related to market customs, the content of which would be best left for the courts to define. In certain decisions of judicial bodies, I recognise difficulties in applying some of the basic concepts of insider dealing, such as reasonable investor test, relevance of market information, differentiation between disclosure and publicity of inside information, clear separation between corporate legal obligations and market regulatory obligations, etc. Legal theory has failed to contribute an in-depth discussion to many of these issues.
Keywords: criminal offence of insider dealing, insider dealing, inside information, unlawful disclosure of inside information, market abuse, financial instruments, market in financial instruments, Market Abuse Regulation 596/2014, Market Abuse Directive 2014/57, insider, criminal law, policy, blanket provision, descriptive and normative elements of criminal offence, principle of non-discrimination, principle of foreseeability, principle of proportionality, due diligence
