Signal review
Keep case files for order, transaction, quote, cancellation, liquidity, and communications events that could create false or misleading supply, demand, or price signals.
What Article 91 changes operationally
Prohibition of market manipulation: Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 Article 91 addresses engaging or attempting to engage in market manipulation in relation to crypto-assets covered by the MiCA market-abuse title.
Article 91 includes transactions, orders to trade, and other behaviour that give, or are likely to give, false or misleading signals about supply, demand, or price, or that secure, or are likely to secure, an abnormal or artificial price.
It also covers disseminating information through the media, including the internet or any other means, where that information gives or is likely to give false or misleading signals, including rumours, where the person knew or ought to have known that the information was false or misleading.
For operating evidence, treat Article 91 as a reason to retain order-book surveillance notes, communications review, price-integrity escalations, issuer or venue announcements, social-media and rumour handling, conflicts links, and governance decisions.
This page is a control-mapping checklist. It is not a legal interpretation, market-abuse determination, trading recommendation, filing guide, broker recommendation, surveillance-system recommendation, or assurance about any order, transaction, behaviour, communication, rumour, person, or fact pattern.
Article 91 evidence map
Price-integrity file
Document abnormal or artificial price alerts, rationale for escalation or closure, related accounts, venue status, liquidity context, and unresolved counsel or compliance questions.
Information dissemination
Track issuer statements, venue notices, customer communications, staff or affiliate posts, media interactions, internet channels, rumours, correction decisions, and source ownership.
Governance handoffs
Connect market-manipulation reviews to Article 86 scope, Article 87 inside information, Article 88 disclosure, Article 89 insider dealing, Article 90 unlawful disclosure, Article 72 conflicts, and Article 68 governance controls.
Broker, insurer, partner, and internal-risk diligence questions
- Evidence sources: order and transaction trails, trade-surveillance alerts, communications archives, social-media review logs, incident records, conflicts registers, and governance escalation notes.
- Decision records: affected crypto-assets, venue or service context, timestamps, alert owner, reviewed behaviour, source of rumours or public statements, corrective action, and unresolved assumptions.
- Handoff pages: link the file to Article 86 market-abuse scope, Article 87 inside information, Article 88 public disclosure, Article 89 insider dealing, Article 90 unlawful disclosure, Article 72 conflicts, and Article 68 governance controls.
FAQ
What does MiCA Article 91 cover?
Article 91 is titled “Prohibition of market manipulation” and covers market-manipulation risks such as false or misleading signals about supply, demand, or price, abnormal or artificial price outcomes, and dissemination of false or misleading information, including rumours.
Why does Article 91 matter for CASP evidence packs?
CASPs, trading venues, issuers, offerors, and service providers may need evidence that order activity, price-integrity alerts, communications, rumours, conflicts, disclosure handoffs, and governance escalation are mapped before market-abuse, partner, auditor, counsel, broker, insurer, or internal-risk review.
How does Article 91 connect to operational risk?
Market-manipulation controls can expose gaps in surveillance coverage, order-book monitoring, communications review, social-media controls, conflicts escalation, incident handling, governance ownership, and evidence retention. Those gaps can matter operationally without turning this page into legal, trading, surveillance, or insurance advice.