Related provisions for LR 11.1.5A
381 - 400 of 649 items.
Sections 292(3) and 292(4) state:
2Section 292(3) |
|
The requirements are that- |
|
(a) |
investors are afforded protection equivalent to that which they would be afforded if the body concerned were required to comply withrecognition requirements; |
(b) |
there are adequate procedures for dealing with a person who is unable, or likely to become unable, to meet his obligations in respect of one or more market contracts connected with the [ROIE] or [ROCH]; |
(c) |
the applicant is able and willing to co-operate with the[FSA] by the sharing of information and in other ways; and |
(d) |
adequate arrangements exist for co-operation between the[FSA] and those responsible for the supervision of the applicant in the country or territory in which the applicant's head office is situated. |
Section 292(4) |
|
In considering whether it is satisfied as to the requirements mentioned in subsections (3)(a) and (b), the[FSA] is to have regard to- |
|
(a) |
the relevant law and practice of the country or territory in which the applicant's head office is situated; |
(b) |
the rules and practices of the applicant. |
An issuer whose registered office is in a non-EEA State whose relevant laws are considered equivalent by the FSA is exempted from the rules on annual financial reports in DTR 4.1 (other than DTR 4.1.7R (4) which continues to apply),1 half-yearly financial reports (DTR 4.2) and interim management statements (DTR 4.3).1
The FSA maintains a published list of non-EEA States which, for the purpose of article 23.1 of the TD, are judged to have laws which lay down requirements equivalent to those imposed upon issuers by this chapter. Such issuers remain subject to the following requirements of DTR 6:(1) the filing of information with the FSA;(2) the language provisions; and(3) the dissemination of information provisions.
(1) The authorised fund manager may, with the prior agreement of the depositary, and must without delay, if the depositary so requires, temporarily1 suspend the issue, cancellation, sale and redemption of units in an authorised fund (referred to in this chapter as "dealings in units"), where due to exceptional circumstances it is in the interest of all the unitholders in the authorised fund. (1A) The authorised fund manager and the depositary must ensure that the suspension is
Neither the Post BCCI Directive, MiFID,3 the Insurance Mediation Directive nor the Act define what is meant by a firm's 'head office'. This is not necessarily the firm's place of incorporation or the place where its business is wholly or mainly carried on. Although the FSA will judge each application on a case-by-case basis, the key issue in identifying the head office of a firm is the location of its central management and control, that is, the location of: 1(1) the directors
1The disclosure rules apply as follows:(1) DTR 1 and DTR 2 apply to an issuer whose financial instruments are admitted to trading on a regulated market in the United Kingdom or for which a request for admission to trading on a regulated market in the United Kingdom has been made;(2) DTR 3 applies to an issuer that is incorporated in the United Kingdom:(a) whose financial instruments are admitted to trading on a regulated market; or(b) for whose financial instruments a request
In relation to the disclosure rules, the FSA is exercising its functions as the competent authority under Part VI of the Act (see section 72(1) of the Act).Other relevant parts of HandbookNote: Other parts of the Handbook that may also be relevant to persons to whom the disclosure rules apply include DEPP (Decision Procedure and Penalties Manual)3 and 3Chapter 9 of SUP (the Supervision manual).The following Regulatory Guides are also relevant:31. The Enforcement Guide (EG)32.
If it appears to the FSA that an actuary1 has failed to comply with a duty imposed on him under the Act, it may disqualify him under section 345 of the Act. For more detail about what happens when the disqualification of an actuary is being considered or put into effect, see EG 155 (Disqualification of auditors and actuaries)1. A list of actuaries who are disqualified by the FSA may be found on the FSA website (www.fsa.gov.uk).15
The FSA will consider all the relevant circumstances of the case when deciding whether to impose a penalty or issue a public censure. As such, the factors set out in DEPP 6.4.2 G are not exhaustive. Not all of the factors may be relevant in a particular case and there may be other factors, not listed, that are relevant.
The criteria for determining whether it is appropriate to issue a public censure rather than impose a financial penalty include those factors that the FSA will consider in1 determining the amount of penalty set out in DEPP 6.5 A to DEPP 6.5 D.1 Some particular considerations that may be relevant when the FSA determines whether to issue a public censure rather than impose a financial penalty are:1(1) whether or not deterrence may be effectively achieved by issuing a public censure;(2)
(1) The Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (the Act) is the UK legislation under which bodies corporate, partnerships, individuals and unincorporated associations are permitted by the FSA to carry on various financial activities which are subject to regulation (referred to as regulated activities).(2) The activities which are regulated activities are specified in the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Regulated Activities) Order 2001 (the Regulated Activities Order):
PERG 1.4.1 G (General guidance to be found in PERG) summarises the general guidance contained in PERG. Readers should note that in a cross-reference, as explained in paragraph 40 of the Readers' Guide, the code letters of the manual or sourcebook immediately precede the chapter number. For example, PERG 1 is the first chapter of the Perimeter Guidance manual. PERG 1.5 provides details of and links to other general guidance on perimeter issues that is available on the FSA webs
(1) Notification of suspicious transactions to the FSA requires sufficient indications (which may not be apparent until after the transaction has taken place) that the transaction might constitute market abuse. In particular a firm will need to be able to explain the basis for its suspicion when notifying the FSA (see SUP 15.10 R). Certain transactions by themselves may seem completely devoid of anything suspicious, but might deliver such indications of possible market abuse,
An investment firm or a credit institution making a notification to the FSA under this section may do so:(1) by mail to:Market Conduct Team25 The North ColonnadeCanary WharfLondon E14 5HS; or(2) by electronic mail to market.abuse@fsa.gov.uk;(3) by facsimile to the Market Conduct Team on 020 7066 1099; or(4) by telephone to the market abuse helpline 020 7066 4900. [Note: Article 10 2004/72/EC]
4It is the responsibility of an insurance intermediary's senior management to determine, on a continuing basis, whether the insurance intermediary is an exempt insurance intermediary and to appoint an auditor if management determines the firm is no longer exempt. SUP 3.7 (amplified by SUP 15) sets out what a firm should consider when deciding whether it should notify the FSA of matters raised by its auditor.6
4The rights and duties of auditors are set out in SUP 3.8 (Rights and duties of all auditors) and SUP 3.10 (Duties of auditors: notification and report on client assets). SUP 3.8.10 G includes the auditor's statutory duty to report certain matters to the FSA imposed by regulations made by the Treasury under sections 342(5) and 343(5) of the Act (information given by auditor or actuary to the FSA). An auditor should bear these rights and duties in mind when carrying out client
(1) 1This rule deals with the calculation of:(a) a firm'sgeneral levy in the 12 months ending on the 31 March in which it obtains permission, or was authorised under the Payment Services Regulations or had its permission and/or payment services activities extended (relevant permissions)3 and the following 12 months ending on the 31 March;3 and33(b) the tariff base for the industry blocks that relate to each of the relevant permissions3.3(2) Unless this rule says otherwise, the
1The table below sets out the period within which a firm's tariff base is calculated (the data period) for second year levies calculated under FEES 5.8.2R. The example is based on a firm that acquires permission on 1 November 2009and has a financial year ending 31 March. Where valuation dates fall before the firm receives permission it should use projected valuations in calculating its levies.
References in this table to dates or months are references to the latest one occurring before the start of the FSA's financial year unless otherwise stated.
Type of permission acquired on 1 November |
Tariff base |
Valuation date but for FEES 5.8.2R |
Data period under FEES 5.8.2R |
Insurers - general |
Relevant annual gross premium income |
31 March 2009- so projected valuations will be used |
1 November to 31 December 2009. |
Fund managers (including those holding client money/assets and not holding client money/assets |
Relevant funds under management |
Valued at 31 December |
Valued at 31 December |
Advisory arrangers, dealers or brokers holding and controlling client money and/or assets |
Number of relevant persons approved to perform the customer function with certain exclusions |
Relevant approved persons as at 31 December |
Relevant approved persons as at 31 December |
If a firm ceases to be a participant firm part way through a financial year of the compensation scheme:(1) it will remain liable for any unpaid levies which the FSCS has already made on the firm;1(2) the FSCS may make a levy upon it (which may be before or after the firmhas ceased to be a participant firm, but must be before it ceases to be an authorised person) for the costs which it would have been liable to pay had the FSCS made a levy on all participant firms at the time
If it appears to the FSA that an appropriate actuary has failed to comply with a duty imposed on him under the Act, it may disqualify him under section 345 of the Act. For more detail about what happens when the disqualification of an actuary is being considered or put into effect, see EG 153 (Disqualification of auditors and actuaries)2. A list of actuaries who have been disqualified by the FSA may be found on the FSA website (www.fsa.gov.uk).3
The following rules in FEES apply to VJ participants as part of the standard terms, but substituting 'VJ participant' for 'firm':(1) FEES 2.2.1 R (late payment) but substituting 'FOS Ltd' for 'the FSA';(2) FEES 2.3.1 R and 2.3.2 R (remission of fees);(3) FEES 4.2.6 R (1)(b) (periodic fees);(4) FEES 5.3.6 R (general levy) but substituting:(a) 'Voluntary Jurisdiction' for 'Compulsory Jurisdiction' ; and(b) 'FOS Ltd' for 'the FSA';(5) FEES 5.3.8 R (calculation of general levy) but
A primary pooling event occurs:(1) on the failure of the firm;(2) on the vesting of assets in a
trustee
in accordance with an 'assets requirement' imposed under section 48(1)(b)of the Act;(3) on the coming into force of a requirement for all client money held by the firm; or(4) when the firm notifies, or is in breach of its duty to notify, the FSA, in accordance with
CASS 7.6.16 R
(Notification requirements), that it is unable correctly to identify and allocate in its records
(1) COBS 11.8.8R (2) includes conversations and communications relating to specific transactions which are intended to lead to the conclusion of an agreement by the firm to deal with or on behalf of the client as principal or agent, even if those conversations or communications do not lead to the conclusion of such an agreement. It does not include conversations or communications which are not intended to lead to the conclusion of such an agreement, such as general conversations
A firm must take reasonable steps to retain all records made by it under COBS 11.8.5 R:(1) for a period of at least 6 months from the date the record was created;(2) in a medium that allows the storage of the information in a way accessible for future reference by the FSA, and so that the following conditions are met:(a) the FSA must be able to access the records readily;(b) it must be possible for any corrections or other amendments, and the contents of the records prior to such
The FSA's penalty-setting regime is based on the following principles:(1) Disgorgement - a firm or individual should not benefit from any breach;(2) Discipline - a firm or individual should be penalised for wrongdoing; and(3) Deterrence - any penalty imposed should deter the firm or individual who committed the breach, and others, from committing further or similar breaches.
(1) The total amount payable by a person subject to enforcement action may be made up of two elements: (i) disgorgement of the benefit received as a result of the breach; and (ii) a financial penalty reflecting the seriousness of the breach. These elements are incorporated in a five-step framework, which can be summarised as follows:(a) Step 1: the removal of any financial benefit derived directly from the breach;(b) Step 2: the determination of a figure which reflects the seriousness