I think that I can confidently say that Mr Flavin has made many more than three (but perhaps not as many as I have). However, I am confining myself here to setting out what I see as his three key errors in the transaction which gave rise to the action against his company (DCC plc) by Fyffes plc.
Failure to Use the Legal Shield
The law of which Mr Flavin fell foul provided a mechanism which, had it been used, would have protected him and DCC from Fyffes'action.The provision is here.The Inspector's report reveals that in 1995, Michael Scholefield, DCC's compliance officer, actually suggested using this mechanism. Unfortunately, the idea was not followed up.
Talking to the Buyers
Within DCC, only Mr Flavin had the information which was later deemed price-sensitive. Had he referred the first call from Kyran McLaughlin (representing the first group of eventual buyers of the Fyffes' shares) to Fergal O'Dwyer or another director of Lotus Green, it is likely that the outcome of the court case would have been different.
Insufficient Legal Advice
Mr Flavin discussed his awareness of the information with Mr Scholefield and with the company's solicitor, Alvin Price of William Fry, but he did not fully share with either of them the exact nature of the information. He did not seek a meeting with, or formal opinion from, senior counsel.
Even if more extensive consultation had not changed the advice given, he would have been less likely to have been subject to the criticism that he had merely "gone through the motions".