United States: SEC Held To Five-Year Statute Of Limitations For Civil Penalty Claims

On February 27, 2013, in Gabelli v. Securities and Exchange Commission,1 a unanimous Supreme Court rebuffed an effort by the Securities and Exchange Commission to expand the limitations period for civil penalty claims beyond the five-year period set by statute. The SEC argued that its penalty claim accrued when it discovered the misconduct, and not when the misconduct occurred. The Court disagreed, holding that such a "discovery rule," used in private actions for damages, does not apply to Government actions for penalties.

While the Gabelli decision could increase the number of SEC cases brought this year that relate to the nearly five-year-old financial crisis, the holding will probably not impact the SEC's enforcement agenda significantly since it does not squarely apply to claims for equitable relief, such as injunctions and disgorgement. In addition, while the SEC will still be able to obtain penalties in settled actions based on older conduct, Gabelli may work to reduce such penalties. More significant for the SEC is that the broad reasoning of Gabelli suggests that the Court may not endorse the SEC's view that there is no statute of limitations for equitable relief.


In April 2008, the SEC brought two actions charging that an investor in a Gabelli mutual fund had received favorable treatment that was not disclosed to other investors: (1) a settled administrative proceeding against Gabelli Funds, LLC, an investment advisor headed by Mario Gabelli; and (2) a contested action filed in the Southern District of New York against a portfolio manager, Mario Gabelli's son, as well as the chief operating officer of Gabelli Funds, LLC. These matters were among the last of many SEC actions in the last decade involving active buying and selling of shares in mutual funds to allegedly exploit short-term pricing inefficiencies, a practice often referred to as "market timing" that was brought to light by then Attorney General Eliot Spitzer on September 3, 2003. The SEC alleged that the Gabelli defendants had permitted one of the mutual fund's investors to engage in active trading in the fund's shares as a quid pro quo for the investor's agreement to keep money in a hedge fund run by one of the defendants. According to the SEC, this favored treatment was highly profitable to the investor, but was secret, and not disclosed to other shareholders or the fund's board, so the SEC did not discover the fraud until late 2003.2

In the federal court action, the SEC sought to enjoin the individual defendants from future violations, and to obtain disgorgement of their allegedly ill-gotten gains (plus prejudgment interest) and a civil monetary penalty under Section 209(e) of the Investment Advisers Act. As to one of the individual defendants, the SEC also charged a violation of the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and sought a monetary penalty under those statutes as well.3

The defendants moved to dismiss the complaint on various bases, including that the claim for civil penalties was barred by the five-year statute of limitations in 28 U.S.C. § 2462, which states that, unless Congress provides otherwise, "an action, suit or proceeding for the enforcement of any civil fine, penalty, or forfeiture" must be "commenced within five years from the date when the claim first accrued."

In March 2010, District Judge Deborah Batts dismissed most of the SEC's claims, including the claim for penalties on the ground that it was time-barred.4 She also dismissed the injunctive claims, finding that there was no reasonable basis for anticipating future violations by the two individuals, both then former employees of Gabelli Funds, LLC. She left standing the SEC's claim for disgorgement of any unlawful profits, determining that it was not time-barred. (This was a Pyrrhic victory for the SEC, however, given that Gabelli Funds, LLC had already disgorged the profits relating to market timing, and any "profit" made by the individual defendants as a result of the alleged conduct was small.)

Both sides appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit: the SEC challenged, among other things, the holding as to penalties and injunctive relief, and the defendants challenged the holding as to disgorgement.5 District Court Judge Jed Rakoff, sitting by designation, authored an opinion that handed the SEC a complete victory. The Second Circuit, relying on Merck & Co. v. Reynolds,6 held that the penalty claim accrued only when the SEC discovered it; it also held that it was improper to rule out injunctive relief as a matter of law at the motion-to-dismiss stage. The defendants appealed the Second Circuit's holding on the penalty (but not the other relief) to the Supreme Court, which agreed, in September 2012, to hear the case.

The Supreme Court Decision

The Court unanimously reversed the Second Circuit's decision. In the opinion, Chief Justice Roberts framed the issue simply: "whether the five-year clock begins to tick when the fraud is complete or when the fraud is discovered." The Court found that the "most natural reading" of 28 U.S.C. § 2462 is that "a claim based on fraud accrues—and the five-year clock begins to tick—when a defendant's allegedly fraudulent conduct occurs." It also noted that "we have never applied the discovery rule in this context, where the plaintiff is not a defrauded victim seeking recompense, but is instead the Government bringing an enforcement action for civil penalties."

But rather than resolve the question based solely on the plain reading of the statute, the Court also pointed to the policy favoring sharp clarity in the reading of statutes of repose, which are "intended to 'promote justice by preventing surprises through the revival of claims that have been allowed to slumber until evidence has been lost, memories have faded, and witnesses have disappeared.'" The Court found such an approach to be "vital to the welfare of society," adding that "even wrongdoers are entitled to assume that their sins may be forgotten."

The Court distinguished Merck v. Reynolds and an earlier case in which the Government was itself the victim of fraud, Exploration Co. v. United States,7 explaining that in an enforcement action the Government is in a very different posture from "the defrauded victim the discovery rule evolved to protect." The difference, the Court reasoned, stems from the Government's role in detecting fraud and its superior ability to do so. Unlike private citizens, who "do not live in a state of constant investigation," and "do not typically spend [their] days looking for evidence that we were . . . defrauded," the SEC's "central mission" is to root out fraud, and it has many tools to do so.

The Court also explained that the monetary penalties sought by the SEC are different in kind from monetary damages sought by private plaintiffs. Penalties are intended to punish culpable individuals, the Court held, "not to extract compensation and restore the status quo." Quoting Chief Justice John Marshall, Chief Justice Roberts wrote that it "would be utterly repugnant to the genius of our laws" if actions for penalties could "be brought at any distance of time." He added that, as a practical matter, it would be extremely difficult to determine precisely when "the government" came to learn of something.


The Court's rejection of the "discovery rule" for monetary penalties in SEC enforcement actions is obviously a favorable development for many would-be defendants, particularly financial institutions and public companies as to whom the SEC seeks ever increasing penalties. Had the Court adopted the SEC's position, for example, the SEC could have sought penalties against the Gabelli defendants based on trades dating all the way back to 1999. Nonetheless, the SEC seems to be downplaying the significance of the decision, recently noting that "we do not expect an immediate impact on our ability to successfully hold violators accountable for their misconduct."8

While the Court's decision in Gabelli on statutes of limitation was limited to interpreting 28 U.S.C. § 2462, it could have wider application should the Court also decide that SEC injunctions and/or disgorgement are effectively "penalties," and thus subject to the same time bar. Two weeks before Gabelli was decided, the SEC sought Supreme Court review of the Fifth Circuit's decision in SEC v. Bartek,9 a case involving options back-dating.10 In Bartek, the appeals court had ruled against the SEC on the same issue that was appealed to the Court in Gabelli, as well as on the important question left open by the Court in Gabelli: whether injunctions, including officer-and-director bars, are subject to the same time bar as actions for penalties. In an unpublished opinion, the Fifth Circuit affirmed a district court summary judgment decision in favor of the defendants, holding that SEC claims for equitable relief were effectively penal in view of their "severity and permanent nature." Given the Court's decision in Gabelli—that actions for penalties are time-barred if brought more than five years after the conduct—the SEC has even more reason to seek reversal of the Bartek decision. But the broad language in Gabelli on the virtues of repose and the SEC's duty to investigate may cause the SEC to rethink their appeal in Bartek, since an adverse decision from the Court on the penal nature of injunctions and disgorgement would change a long-standing SEC practice of reaching back well beyond five years in injunctive actions seeking disgorgement.


The holding in Gabelli could well reduce the penalty amounts sought by the SEC in settlement discussions involving older conduct, by confining the bases for penalties to conduct that occurred within the five years prior to the filing of an action, and/or five years prior to the execution of a tolling agreement, to the extent that an action has not yet been filed. This will affect not only new cases, but currently pending actions and investigations, as the SEC will no longer be able to recover such penalties in litigated matters and may thus be willing to restart settlement talks at new, lower levels for the penalty portion of the settlement.


1 Gabelli v. S.E.C., No. 11-1274, slip op. (Feb. 27, 2013).

2 Complaint at ¶¶ 46-47, S.E.C. v. Gabelli, No. 08 CV 3868 (DAB), 2010 WL 1253603 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 17, 2010), available at www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2008/comp20539.pdf

3 In the settled administrative proceeding, Gabelli Funds, LLC agreed to disgorge unlawful profits totaling $9,700,000 (plus prejudgment interest of $1,300,000), and to pay a civil monetary penalty of $5,000,000, for a total payment of $16,000,000. See Gabelli Funds LLC, Investment Advisers Act Release No. 2727, Investment Company Act Release No. 28253 (Apr. 24, 2008), available at


4 S.E.C. v. Gabelli, No. 08 CV 3868 (DAB), 2010 WL 1253603 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 17, 2010).

5 S.E.C. v. Gabelli, 653 F.3d 49, 56 (2d Cir. 2011).

6 130 S. Ct. 1784 (2010).

7 247 U.S. 435 (1918).

8 Dina ElBoghdady, Supreme Court defines time limits for SEC to pursue civil cases, Feb. 27, 2013, Wash. Post, available at


9 No. 11-10594, 2012 WL 3205446 (5th Cir. Aug. 7, 2012).

10 Petition for Writ of Certiorari, S.E.C. v. Bartek, No. 12-1000, 2013 WL 543280 (Feb. 13, 2003).

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions