Related provisions for SUP 11.7.1

421 - 440 of 480 items.

Search Term(s)

Filter by Topics

Filter by Modules

Filter by Documents

Filter by Keywords

Effective Period

Similar To

To access the FCA Handbook Archive choose a date between 1 January 2001 and 31 December 2004 (From field only).

FEES 4.2.2AGRP
64A recognised body may also have obligations to pay fees to the FCA under other rules arising from legislation other than the Act. For example a recognised body may have an obligation to pay a fee as an approved operator of a relevant system under the Uncertificated Securities Regulations 1995 (SI 1995/3272).
SUP 14.2.1GRP
Where an incoming EEA firm is exercising an EEA right, other than under the Insurance Mediation Directive, and has established a branch in the United Kingdom, the EEA Passport Rights Regulations govern any changes to the details of that branch. Where an incoming EEA firm has complied with the relevant requirements in the EEA Passport Rights Regulations, then the firm'spermission given under Schedule 3 to the Act is to be treated as varied accordingly. All references to regulations
PERG 8.36.1GRP
This flowchart sets out the matters which a person will need to consider to see if the restriction in section 21 of the Act applies to his communications. It is referred to in PERG 8.2.5 G.6
MAR 1.1.3GRP
The FCA's statement of policy about the imposition and amount of penalties in cases of market abuse (required by section 124 of the Act) is in DEPP 63 .3
SYSC 2.1.6GRP

Frequently asked questions about allocation of functions in SYSC 2.1.3 R

This table belongs to SYSC 2.1.5 G

Question

Answer

1

Does an individual to whom a function is allocated under SYSC 2.1.3 R need to be an approved person?

An individual to whom a function is allocated under SYSC 2.1.3 R will be performing the apportionment and oversight function (CF 8, see SUP 10A.7.1 R15) and an application must be made under section 59 of the Act for approval of the individual before the function is performed. There are exceptions from this inSUP 10A.115 (Approved persons - Application).

15155

2

If the allocation is to more than one individual, can they perform the functions, or aspects of the functions, separately?

If the functions are allocated to joint chief executives under SYSC 2.1.4 R, column 2, they are expected to act jointly. If the functions are allocated to an individual under SYSC 2.1.4 R, column 2, in addition to individuals under SYSC 2.1.4 R, column 3, the former may normally be expected to perform a leading role in relation to the functions that reflects his position. Otherwise, yes.

3

What is meant by "appropriately allocate" in this context?

The allocation of functions should be compatible with delivering compliance with Principle 3, SYSC 2.1.1 R and SYSC 3.1.1 R. The appropriate regulator considers that allocation to one or two individuals is likely to be appropriate for most firms.

4

If a committee of management governs a firm or group, can the functions be allocated to every member of that committee?

Yes, as long as the allocation remains appropriate (see Question 3).If the firm also has an individual as chief executive, then the functions must be allocated to that individual as well under SYSC 2.1.4 R, column 2 (see Question 7).

5

Does the definition of chief executive include the possessor of equivalent responsibilities with another title, such as a managing director or managing partner?

Yes.

6

Is it possible for a firm to have more than one individual as its chief executive?

Although unusual, some firm may wish the responsibility of a chief executive to be held jointly by more than one individual. In that case, each of them will be a chief executive and the functions must be allocated to all of them under SYSC 2.1.4 R, column 2 (see also Questions 2 and 7).

7

If a firm has an individual as chief executive, must the functions be allocated to that individual?

Normally, yes, under SYSC 2.1.4 R, column 2.

But if the firm is a body corporate and a member of a group, the functions may, instead of to the firm's chief executive, be allocated to a director or senior manager from the group responsible for the overall management of the group or of a relevant group division, so long as this is appropriate (see Question 3). Such individuals may nevertheless require approval under section 59 (see Question 1).

If the firm chooses to allocate the functions to a director or senior manager responsible for the overall management of a relevant group division, the appropriate regulator would expect that individual to be of a seniority equivalent to or greater than a chief executive of the firm for the allocation to be appropriate.

See also Question 14.

8

If a firm has a chief executive, can the functions be allocated to other individuals in addition to the chief executive?

Yes. SYSC 2.1.4 R, column 3, permits a firm to allocate the functions, additionally, to the firm's (or where applicable the group's) directors and senior managers as long as this is appropriate (see Question 3).

9

What if a firm does not have a chief executive?

Normally, the functions must be allocated to one or more individuals selected from the firm's (or where applicable the group's) directors and senior managers under SYSC 2.1.4 R, column 3.

But if the firm:

(1) is a body corporate and a member of a group; and

(2) the group has a director or senior manager responsible for the overall management of the group or of a relevant group division;

then the functions must be allocated to that individual (together, optionally, with individuals from column 3 if appropriate) under SYSC 2.1.4 R, column 2.2

10

What do you mean by "group division within which some or all of the firm's regulated activities fall"?

A "division" in this context should be interpreted by reference to geographical operations, product lines or any other method by which the group's business is divided.

If the firm's regulated activities fall within more than one division and the firm does not wish to allocate the functions to its chief executive, the allocation must, under SYSC 2.1.4 R, be to:

(1) a director or senior manager responsible for the overall management of the group; or

(2) a director or senior manager responsible for the overall management of one of those divisions;

together, optionally, with individuals from column 3 if appropriate. (See also Questions 7 and 9.)

11

How does the requirement to allocate the functions in SYSC 2.1.3R apply to an overseas firm which is not an incoming EEA firm, incoming Treaty firm or UCITS qualifier?

The firm must appropriately allocate those functions to one or more individuals, in accordance with SYSC 2.1.4 R, but:

(1) The responsibilities that must be apportioned and the systems and controls that must be overseen are those relating to activities carried on from a UK establishment with certain exceptions (see SYSC 1 Annex 1.1.7 R)6. Note that SYSC 1 Annex 1.1.10 R6 does not extend the territorial scope of SYSC 2 for an overseas firm.

(2) The chief executive of an overseas firm is the person responsible for the conduct of the firm's business within the United Kingdom (see the definition of "chief executive"). This might, for example, be the manager of the firm's UK establishment, or it might be the chief executive of the firm as a whole, if he has that responsibility.

The apportionment and oversight function applies to such a firm, unless it falls within a particular exception from the approved persons regime (see Question 1).

66

12

How does the requirement to allocate the functions in SYSC 2.1.3R apply to an incoming EEA firm or incoming Treaty firm?

SYSC 1 Annex 1.1.1R6and SYSC 1 Annex 1.1.8 R6restrict the application of SYSC 2.1.3 R for such a firm. Accordingly:

(1) Such a firm is not required to allocate the function of dealing with apportionment in SYSC 2.1.3 R (1).

(2) Such a firm is required to allocate the function of oversight in SYSC 2.1.3 R (2). However, the systems and controls that must be overseen are those relating to matters which the appropriate regulator, as Host State regulator, is entitled to regulate (there is guidance on this in SUP 13A Annex 2 G3). Those are primarily, but not exclusively, the systems and controls relating to the conduct of the firm's activities carried on from its UK branch.

(3) Such a firm need not allocate the function of oversight to its chief executive; it must allocate it to one or more directors and senior managers of the firm or the firm's group under SYSC 2.1.4 R, row (2).

(4) An incoming EEA firm which has provision only for cross border services is not required to allocate either function if it does not carry on regulated activities in the United Kingdom; for example if they fall within the overseas persons exclusions in article 72 of the Regulated Activities Order.

See also Questions 1 and 15.1

663

13

What about a firm that is a partnership or a limited liability partnership?

The appropriate regulator envisages that most if not all partners or members will be either directors or senior managers, but this will depend on the constitution of the partnership (particularly in the case of a limited partnership) or limited liability partnership. A partnership or limited liability partnership may also have a chief executive (see Question 5). A limited liability partnership is a body corporate and, if a member of a group, will fall within SYSC 2.1.4 R, row (1) or (2).

14

What if generally accepted principles of good corporate governance recommend that the chief executive should not be involved in an aspect of corporate governance?

The Note to SYSC 2.1.4 R provides that the chief executive or other executive director or senior manager need not be involved in such circumstances. For example, the UK Corporate Governance Code7 recommends that the board of a listed company should establish an audit committee of non-executive directors to be responsible for oversight of the audit. That aspect of the oversight function may therefore be allocated to the members of such a committee without involving the chief executive. Such individuals may require approval under section 59 in relation to that function (see Question 1).

7

15

What about electronic commerce activities carried on from an establishment in another EEA State with or for a person in the United Kingdom?4

4

SYSC does not apply to an incoming ECA provider acting as such.1

4
REC 4.4.2GRP
The Act does not provide a mechanism for appeals to the FCA2 from decisions by recognised bodies in relation to complaints. However, the FCA2 is required by section 299 of the Act (Complaints about recognised bodies) to have arrangements to investigate complaints (called relevant complaints in the Act) which it considers relevant to the question of whether a recognised body should remain recognised as such. This section describes aspects of the FCA's2 arrangements for investigating
PERG 8.13.4GRP
Intermediaries involved with arranging and advising on deposits may be unauthorised persons as such activities do not amount to regulated activities (other than where they involve giving basic advice on a stakeholder product (article 52A of the Regulated Activities Order (Giving basic advice on a stakeholder product))) and so do not require authorisation under section 19 of the Act. However, the combination of the exemptions in Part V together with certain of the exemptions in
REC 1.2.3GRP
(1) This sourcebook contains quotations from the Act, the Recognition Requirements Regulations, the RAP regulations3 and the Companies Act 1989 and the MiFID Regulation2and, where necessary, words have been added to, or substituted for, the text of these provisions to facilitate understanding.(2) The additions and substitutions are enclosed in square brackets ([ ]). The omission of words within a quotation is indicated by three dots (...).(3) Any words in these quotations which
COBS 4.10.3GRP
(1) Section 21(1) of the Act (Restrictions on financial promotion) prohibits an unauthorised person from communicating a financial promotion, in the course of business, unless an exemption applies or the financial promotion is approved by a firm. Many of the rules in this chapter apply when a firmapproves a financial promotion in the same way as when a firmcommunicates a financial promotion itself.(2) A firm may also wish to approve a financial promotion that it communicates itself.
REC 2.4.3GRP
In determining whether a UK recognised body is a fit and proper person, the FCA4 may have regard to any relevant factor including, but not limited to:4(1) the commitment shown by the UK recognised body'sgoverning body to satisfying the recognition requirements and to complying with other obligations in or under the Act;(2) its arrangements, policies and resources for fulfilling its obligations under the Act in relation to its activities as a UK recognised body;(3) the extent to
APER 2.1A.3PRP

Statements of Principle issued under section 64 of the Act

Statement of Principle 1

An approved person must act with integrity in carrying out his accountable functions.

Statement of Principle 2

An approved person must act with due skill, care and diligence in carrying out his accountable functions.

Statement of Principle 3

An approved person must observe proper standards of market conduct in carrying out his accountable functions.

Statement of Principle 4

An approved person must deal with the FCA, the PRA and other regulators in an open and cooperative way and must disclose appropriately any information of which the FCA or the PRA would reasonably expect notice.

Statement of Principle 5

An approved person performing an accountable significant-influence function must take reasonable steps to ensure that the business of the

firm

for which he is responsible in his accountable function is organised so that it can be controlled effectively.

Statement of Principle 6

An approved person performing an accountable significant-influence function must exercise due skill, care and diligence in managing the business of the

firm

for which he is responsible in his accountable function.

Statement of Principle 7

An approved person performing an accountable significant-influence function must take reasonable steps to ensure that the business of the

firm

for which he is responsible in his accountable function complies with the relevant requirements and standards of the regulatory system.
PERG 7.6.4GRP
The Act does not specify a time limit for processing the application but the FCA intends to deal with an application as quickly as possible. The more complete and relevant the information provided by an applicant, the more quickly a decision can be expected. But on occasion it may be necessary to allow time in which the FCA can monitor the content of the service. This might happen where, for example, a service is in a form that makes record keeping difficult (such as a large website
COLL 11.4.5GRP
Section 351A (Disclosure under the UCITS directive) of the Act provides that where a trustee of an AUT or the depositary of an ACS1 which is a master UCITS or a feeder UCITS, or any person acting on their behalf, makes a disclosure to comply with rules implementing Chapter VIII of the UCITS Directive, that disclosure is not to be taken as a contravention of any duty to which the person making the disclosure is subject. The OEIC Regulations (see regulation 83A) contain corresponding
PERG 8.15.6GRP
A financial promotion made under article 55A must contain a statement in the following terms: “The [firm/company] is not authorised under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 but we are able in certain circumstances to offer a limited range of investment and consumer credit-related2 services to clients because we are members of [relevant designated professional body]. We can provide these investment and consumer credit-related2 services if they are an incidental part
APER 3.1.4GRP
(1) An approved person will only be in breach of a Statement of Principle where he is personally culpable. Personal culpability arises where an approved person's conduct was deliberate or where the approved person's standard of conduct was below that which would be reasonable in all the circumstances (see DEPP 6.2.4 G (Action against approved persons under section 66 of the Act2)).2(2) For the avoidance of doubt, the Statements of Principle do not extend the duties of approved persons