IMO, I don't see how there could be such a mandate in the absence of some kind of actual contractual relationship establishing the analyst as an agent or representative of the company. If you can find some sort of reference, that would be interesting.
It's a complicated issue and I'm not an attorney, but it seems to me that if Teva was deliberately feeding incorrect information to an analyst, this could come into play.
Too long to post the whole thing:
Securities Issuer Liability for Third Party Misstatements: Refining the Entanglement Standard