| Company: | China Life Insurance Company Limited |
| Ticker Symbol: | NYSE: LFC |
| Class Period: | December 22, 2003 to February 3, 2004 |
| Court: | Southern District, NY |
| Date Filed: | Mar-16-04 |
| Lead Plaintiff Deadline: | May-14-04 |
| Allegations: |
A class action has been commenced in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of purchasers of China Life Insurance Company Limited ("China Life") (NYSE:LFC) publicly traded securities during the period between December 22, 2003 and February 3, 2004 (the "Class Period").
The complaint charges China Life and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. China Life is a life insurance company in China. The Company sells its products through an extensive distribution network of exclusive agents, direct sales representatives and dedicated and non-dedicated agencies throughout China.
According to the complaint, China Life has existed in its current form since June 2003, when it was formed to cherry-pick healthier policies from its parent company, China Life Insurance Company. Following the Company's road show in New York just prior to the IPO, China Life's IPO was about 25 times oversubscribed and triggered the sort of frenzy that was reminiscent of the Internet bubble. The IPO was priced at $18.68 on December 16, 2003.
The complaint alleges that during the class period, defendants knew, but failed to disclose the following adverse facts: (i) that the Company, under its old name, and/or its predecessor or parent engaged in a massive financial fraud to the tune of $652 million; (ii) that at the time of the IPO, the National Audit Office of China ("NAO") had completed and/or was imminently about to publish its adverse audit findings of the predecessor company which, under a new name, controls the listed company, China Life; (iii) that the predecessor company, under a different name, engaged in criminal acts involving illegal agent services, illegal premium payments, embezzlement and depositing monies in illegal bank accounts; and (iv) that China Life's share price would be tied to the illegal acts already known to the defendants, two-thirds of whom were directors/executive officers and/or senior managers of the predecessor company. As a result of the defendants' false statements, China Life's stock price traded at inflated levels during the Class Period, increasing to as high as $34.75 on December 29, 2003, shortly after the Company sold more than $3 billion worth of its own shares.
On February 4, 2004, China's state audit office said on its Web site that it had found the equivalent of about $652 million worth of irregularities involving China Life's predecessor company and/or parent company. In a statement on the NAO Web site, Li Jinhua, head of the NAO, was quoted as saying that in its national audit last year, the office found irregularities at China Life Insurance Company, including 2.4 billion yuan involving illegal agent services and premium payments, 2.5 billion yuan in embezzled funds and 31.79 million yuan deposited in illegal bank accounts (the equivalent of $652 million).
If you acquired the securities of the defendants during the Class Period you may, no later than the Lead Plaintiff Deadline shown above, request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff through counsel of your choice. You may also choose to remain an absent class member. A lead plaintiff must meet certain requirements.
The complaint charges China Life and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. China Life is a life insurance company in China. The Company sells its products through an extensive distribution network of exclusive agents, direct sales representatives and dedicated and non-dedicated agencies throughout China.
According to the complaint, China Life has existed in its current form since June 2003, when it was formed to cherry-pick healthier policies from its parent company, China Life Insurance Company. Following the Company's road show in New York just prior to the IPO, China Life's IPO was about 25 times oversubscribed and triggered the sort of frenzy that was reminiscent of the Internet bubble. The IPO was priced at $18.68 on December 16, 2003.
The complaint alleges that during the class period, defendants knew, but failed to disclose the following adverse facts: (i) that the Company, under its old name, and/or its predecessor or parent engaged in a massive financial fraud to the tune of $652 million; (ii) that at the time of the IPO, the National Audit Office of China ("NAO") had completed and/or was imminently about to publish its adverse audit findings of the predecessor company which, under a new name, controls the listed company, China Life; (iii) that the predecessor company, under a different name, engaged in criminal acts involving illegal agent services, illegal premium payments, embezzlement and depositing monies in illegal bank accounts; and (iv) that China Life's share price would be tied to the illegal acts already known to the defendants, two-thirds of whom were directors/executive officers and/or senior managers of the predecessor company. As a result of the defendants' false statements, China Life's stock price traded at inflated levels during the Class Period, increasing to as high as $34.75 on December 29, 2003, shortly after the Company sold more than $3 billion worth of its own shares.
On February 4, 2004, China's state audit office said on its Web site that it had found the equivalent of about $652 million worth of irregularities involving China Life's predecessor company and/or parent company. In a statement on the NAO Web site, Li Jinhua, head of the NAO, was quoted as saying that in its national audit last year, the office found irregularities at China Life Insurance Company, including 2.4 billion yuan involving illegal agent services and premium payments, 2.5 billion yuan in embezzled funds and 31.79 million yuan deposited in illegal bank accounts (the equivalent of $652 million).
If you acquired the securities of the defendants during the Class Period you may, no later than the Lead Plaintiff Deadline shown above, request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff through counsel of your choice. You may also choose to remain an absent class member. A lead plaintiff must meet certain requirements.
If you feel you qualify for damages or remedies that might be awarded in this class action please fill in our form on the right to submit your complaint.
If your injustice does not match the complaint described above, please use this form to register your complaint. Thank you.
